WS Airport Metro

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Both the media release and the map explicitly say the metro extension is to Glenfield.

The extension from Schofield across the floodplain is likely to be viaduct.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21553
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

gilberations wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 12:49 pm Tonyp, the plan states Leppington not Glenfield. You can’t convert Leppington to Glenfield to metro without displacing about 20 or so 8 car sets with nowhere to stable. Interestingly Leppington Yard was built for an eventual extension to be made via the middle two roads to continue to the airport. This is the first confirmation that the extension will be metro and not Sydney trains.

Stupid for them to not build the Tallawong to St Mary’s via Marsden Park and stage 2. This will be a wasted opportunity again, which will force them to have to tunnel through a flood plain.
The original intention for the Leppington line was for it to continue to Rossmore or Bringelly, there is/was a corridor reserved for it. This was long before the airport was a consideration.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Linto63
Posts: 2791
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Linto63 »

tonyp wrote: Both the media release and the map explicitly say the metro extension is to Glenfield.
What a press release or high level white paper state and what actually may happen are two different things.
moa999
Posts: 2922
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by moa999 »


tonyp wrote:Both the media release and the map explicitly say the metro extension is to Glenfield.
.
And this map from latest TFNSW YT video.
Image

But I agree that Leppington would seemingly be far cheaper and still provide access to the old yard for the trains system.

But would make for a double transfer for someone coming from Macquarie Fields or Ingleburn.
At least until the more southern connection to Macarthur is made, which would effectively be Metro West

Last edited by moa999 on Wed Jun 22, 2022 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21553
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

Perhaps they can run the T5 to Campbelltown/Macarthur and build new yards in that area. Maybe the old Glenlee alignment?

The Leppington yard would become storage for the Metro.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

This is IA's more detailed map of the study area - from the future Bradfield station site to Glenfield. Here we can see the alignment more clearly. The dashed line within the alignment is the existing Leppington track. On IA's recommendation, the Federal government is co-funding this study.

Image
Last edited by tonyp on Wed Jun 22, 2022 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Western Sydney Airport Metro: bid to expand line from Aerotropolis to Glenfield via Leppington

More than $150 million has been set aside to expand the Western Sydney Airport Metro from the Aerotropolis to Glenfield - a large chunk of which is set aside for property acquisition.
@jakeMcCallum_
2 min read
June 22, 2022 - 5:35PM
Liverpool Leader

WORK on the new Western Sydney Airport has so far taken four million hours, shifted 23 million cubic metres of earth and shipped in 5.8 million tonnes of sandstone from WestConnex and the Sydney Metro tunnels. This project is on the same scale as the Sydney Harbour Bridge – we’re moving 26 million cubic metres of earth in a metropolitan city, it’s incredible,” dump truck operator Jayne Sheehy said.

Property owners in Sydney’s southwest are being told to brace for widespread property acquisitions — after the NSW Government revealed it secured funding for the southeastern extension of the Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport project.

Tuesday’s NSW Budget revealed funding to build a business case to extend the Metro line from the current southern terminus at Aerotropolis to Glenfield via Leppington.

A massive $60 million was committed to planning a business case for the development of the extended airport metro line, while a further $95 million has been reserved for hardship property acquisitions, according to budget papers.

Property acquisition specialist David Newhouse said residents facing government buyouts should expected to be lowballed by the NSW Government and expect “delays”

“Sydney Metro took more than 6 months, following the announcement of the Hunter Street CBD station, before offers were issued, leaving businesses and property owners in limbo,” he said. “Typically, Sydney Metro has lowballed owners causing unnecessary stress and hardship, as owners are forced to participate in a lengthy process to achieve a fair result.

“In recent times, Sydney Metro has become less likely to negotiate with owners, adopting a take or leave it approach, which is forcing more owners to go to the Valuer-General to receive fair compensation.”

In evidence submitted to the parliamentary inquiry into property acquisitions, Mr Newhouse said clients who pursued an independent valuation by the Valuer General following a breakdown in negotiations with Sydney Metro had received “nearly five times more in compensation from the Valuer-General than what was offered by Sydney Metro”.

Mr Newhouse told the inquiry one affected business owner revealed Sydney Metro offered just $32,000 in compensation, however, the Valuer General determined a 542 per cent increase be paid out.

He said another business owner was offered $414,000 following compulsory acquisition discussions with Sydney Metro, but the Valuer General ordered the government to pay out $1.916 million in compensation.

Liverpool Mayor Ned Mannoun called on the NSW Government to “expand the business case” to include a connection from the Western Sydney Aerotropolis to the Liverpool CBD.

“Putting it simply, Liverpool is the city’s third major CBD and it is on a path to success — if it gets the right infrastructure support from the government,” Cr Mannoun said.

“We would like to see the Metro extended from the Aerotropolis via Leppington and extend past Glenfield and onto Liverpool to provide the opportunity for a future link with the Sydney Metro Southwest at Bankstown.”

While Shadow Transport spokeswoman Jo Haylen called on the government to consider heavy rail options as well as the driverless Metro.

“We can’t afford to see any repeat of the bad practices from this government on property acquisitions they did in the past,” she said.

“All residents involved deserve due process, respect, and a fair settlement.

“It’s important that the Government proceeds with the business case as quickly as possible — any business case should include a comparison between metro and heavy rail so Western Sydney gets the best transport service possible, along with value for money.”

A Sydney Metro spokeswoman told NewsLocal the Western Sydney Airport Metro “will extend from Western Sydney Aerotropolis to Glenfield, via Leppington and will connect to the new Western Sydney International Airport”.

The funding allocation matches that of the federal budget in May.

“The final business case for stage two will provide the design, economic assessment and cost estimation to inform an investment decision for construction of the extension,” the spokeswoman said.

“This includes proposed new station locations, which will be confirmed in future planning assessments.

A metro line between the Western Sydney Aerotropolis and Leppington was identified as part of the Future Transport Strategy 2056. In June 2020, Transport for NSW protected transport corridors in the Western Parkland City to prepare for the project.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21553
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

Secret documents cast doubt over cost of Sydney’s new airport rail line

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/sec ... 5b5o5.html
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

A short article packed with information on the advantages of automated operation, including operating costs and conversion of existing lines, referencing both railway and tram examples.

https://railsystem.net/metro-automation/
Transtopic
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 3:50 pm A short article packed with information on the advantages of automated operation, including operating costs and conversion of existing lines, referencing both railway and tram examples.

https://railsystem.net/metro-automation/
Still waiting to hear about any legacy suburban rail networks being converted to driverless GoA4, as distinct from GoA2, which still has a driver/attendant, but almost as good. It's just not practicable in mixed traffic conditions for safety reasons with the current technology, which they are now belatedly finding out on the Bankstown Line conversion.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Transtopic wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 1:36 am Still waiting to hear about any legacy suburban rail networks being converted to driverless GoA4, as distinct from GoA2, which still has a driver/attendant, but almost as good. It's just not practicable in mixed traffic conditions for safety reasons with the current technology, which they are now belatedly finding out on the Bankstown Line conversion.
They're not belatedly finding anything out on the Bankstown line. The conversion is perfectly feasible. GoA2 is not almost as good because it still has crew on board which at least doubles the operating cost (or more in Sydney because there's a second crewmember too) and introduces operating inefficiencies such as diminished flexibility because of the need to sync with crew rostering, staff absences etc.

I'm not going to go back over research I did on metros over a decade ago, but I recall examples of conversions particularly in the former Comecon countries. One current example off the top of my head is the proposal to convert S-Tog line F in Copenhagen to metro. Like Sydney, Copenhagen is not doing any more expansion of the S-Tog (suburban) system and expanding the metro system. Indeed there's also a study in progress for an international line under the Oresund Strait linking Copenhagen with the Swedish city of Malmo.

https://oresundsmetro.com/en/about-the-oresund-metro

The reasons for choosing metro are the same as in Sydney and anywhere else - greater capacity and better journey time, in this case of the line to Malmo about 15 minutes faster than if it was a suburban train. Average speed will be about 66 km/h, a bit faster than Sydney metro because obviously there will be no stations underwater and frequency will be about 36 trains per hour per direction. Being crewless, trains can also be reversed instantly at termini, which obviously helps maintain such a frequency. A similar extension of the Singapore metro into Malaysia is currently under construction. It looks to me like the demand for suburban systems internationally has ground to a halt and the choice is rapid transit. You're fighting Custer's last stand there Transtopic. Move with the times.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21553
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

The planned extension of the Singapore MRT into Malaysia has been canned, and they are now building a stand alone LRT shuttle line.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 10:11 am The planned extension of the Singapore MRT into Malaysia has been canned, and they are now building a stand alone LRT shuttle line.
An international tram line - nice touch!
Transtopic
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 9:15 am
Transtopic wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 1:36 am Still waiting to hear about any legacy suburban rail networks being converted to driverless GoA4, as distinct from GoA2, which still has a driver/attendant, but almost as good. It's just not practicable in mixed traffic conditions for safety reasons with the current technology, which they are now belatedly finding out on the Bankstown Line conversion.
They're not belatedly finding anything out on the Bankstown line. The conversion is perfectly feasible. GoA2 is not almost as good because it still has crew on board which at least doubles the operating cost (or more in Sydney because there's a second crewmember too) and introduces operating inefficiencies such as diminished flexibility because of the need to sync with crew rostering, staff absences etc.

I'm not going to go back over research I did on metros over a decade ago, but I recall examples of conversions particularly in the former Comecon countries. One current example off the top of my head is the proposal to convert S-Tog line F in Copenhagen to metro. Like Sydney, Copenhagen is not doing any more expansion of the S-Tog (suburban) system and expanding the metro system. Indeed there's also a study in progress for an international line under the Oresund Strait linking Copenhagen with the Swedish city of Malmo.

https://oresundsmetro.com/en/about-the-oresund-metro

The reasons for choosing metro are the same as in Sydney and anywhere else - greater capacity and better journey time, in this case of the line to Malmo about 15 minutes faster than if it was a suburban train. Average speed will be about 66 km/h, a bit faster than Sydney metro because obviously there will be no stations underwater and frequency will be about 36 trains per hour per direction. Being crewless, trains can also be reversed instantly at termini, which obviously helps maintain such a frequency. A similar extension of the Singapore metro into Malaysia is currently under construction. It looks to me like the demand for suburban systems internationally has ground to a halt and the choice is rapid transit. You're fighting Custer's last stand there Transtopic. Move with the times.
I'm talking about converting existing lines to incompatible driverless metro in the context of the impact it has on the residual rail network, not new lines. In the case of the Bankstown Line conversion, there have been safety issues raised which you choose to ignore.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Transtopic wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 1:27 am I'm talking about converting existing lines to incompatible driverless metro in the context of the impact it has on the residual rail network, not new lines. In the case of the Bankstown Line conversion, there have been safety issues raised which you choose to ignore.
And what are those safety issues?

I don't know what you're talking about on the other question. Lines where the suburban trains share tracks with interurban/country/freight trains? They wouldn't be candidates for running automated trains among them, as far as I know the present state of technology.
User avatar
jpp42
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by jpp42 »

tonyp wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 9:15 am It looks to me like the demand for suburban systems internationally has ground to a halt and the choice is rapid transit.
In South Asia this trend is obvious too with all of the major Indian cities who stopped expanding their traditional suburban railways decades ago and have been building metro since the 1990's (Delhi) or more recently (Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bangalore).
User avatar
jpp42
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by jpp42 »

Transtopic wrote: Sat Aug 06, 2022 1:36 am Still waiting to hear about any legacy suburban rail networks being converted to driverless GoA4, as distinct from GoA2, which still has a driver/attendant, but almost as good. It's just not practicable in mixed traffic conditions for safety reasons with the current technology, which they are now belatedly finding out on the Bankstown Line conversion.
From what I can see, Paris Metro Line 1 was built in 1900 and has been retrofitted to GoA4 in 2011. Similar conversion is ongoing for Line 4 (built 1908) and will be in full automated operation in the next few years. Line 4 includes curved platforms just like the Bankstown Line; the PSD's and gap monitoring systems are already in operation since 2021 ( https://www.clearsy.com/en/railway/the- ... -security/ ). Yes, these were built as metros from the start and never compatible with intercity trains like Sydney's suburban lines, but I don't think this changes the level of effort to convert them appreciably, especially given that Sydney already has a "sealed corridor" without grade crossings.

So even if we agree there are no previous exact comparable projects, why should Sydney not be the first? It's rare we have an opportunity to be a leader in technology. Plenty of legacy suburban rail lines have been updated to GoA 2, which requires similar level of lineside infrastructure to GoA4, as the ATO/ATP is essentially the same. The added components to reach GoA 4 such as obstacle detection and platform screen doors, as well as the software systems and control, are not going to be substantially different to greenfield GoA 4 projects. And as noted we won't be the first use case for PSD's on curved platforms; London's Crossrail also has these under construction (Crossrail is only automated in the new tunnels and uses existing older infrastructure in outer areas, so probably operated as GoA2 rather than 4, but I couldn't find a clear reference.)

There are no "mixed traffic conditions" - the Bankstown Line will be isolated, it's simply wrong to call it mixed traffic. Yes, a portion of the Metropolitan Goods Line is adjacent to the Bankstown Line corridor which is an added risk for a Goa4 trains, since a derailment or other intrusion into the corridor is a possibility, but that is true of other objects too (automobiles) - that's what the obstacle detection system (and fence integrity monitoring) is for. Other GoA4 systems operate parallel to lines with lesser automation now, including a short section of Sydney Metro adjacent to Sydney Trains (GoA 1) at Chatswood, as I'm sure you know.

So why shouldn't we be the first to put all these known and proven elements together into a groundbreaking, world first project? We already have the first GoA4 in Australia which has been pretty much a success on all fronts, adding the first brownfield conversion of a suburban rail line is a feather in the cap we should strive for - and I believe in fact, will achieve very successfully.

Mods, please feel free to move these posts about automation conversion to more appropriate threads...
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Final contract awarded for Western Sydney Metro.

https://www.sydneymetro.info/article/fi ... ey-airport

So they will be Siemens trains this time.
User avatar
boxythingy
Posts: 3891
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:48 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Anything not 'B-set' w/problms

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boxythingy »

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/major-backflip-on-emergency-exits-for-sydney-metro-rail-tunnels-20230125-p5cfd3.html wrote: Emergency exits will be built closer together in rail tunnels for two multibillion-dollar metro lines in Sydney after NSW’s fire and rescue agency warned of serious safety risks to emergency workers if they were half a kilometre apart.

In a major about-turn, the agency responsible for the new rail lines, Sydney Metro, will now build cross-passages about 240 metres apart in tunnels on the Metro West and Western Sydney Airport lines.

The decision on Wednesday – which also follows an outcry from the firefighters’ union – is likely to mean more than 60 extra cross-passages will need to be built at a cost of about $100 million. The passages will connect twin rail tunnels on the lines and be used for evacuations of passengers and by firefighters and other first responders in emergencies.

Cross-passages on Sydney’s first two metro lines – Metro Northwest, and Metro City and Southwest – are about 240 metres apart, which is the Australian standard.

Sydney Metro had wanted to space cross-passages 500 metres apart in tunnels for the $27 billion Metro West line from the Sydney CBD to Parramatta, as well as those for the $11 billion line to the new Western Sydney Airport. The agency had argued that assessments showed “negligible difference in safety outcomes between cross-passage spacing” of 240 metres compared with 500 metres.

A raft of internal documents released under freedom-of-information laws show Fire and Rescue NSW had raised serious concerns about the safety implications for firefighters and the public about greater distances between cross-passages on multiple occasions over the last two years.

The agency warned Sydney Metro in January last year that greater distances between cross-passages in the tunnels would introduce “unacceptable health and safety risks to firefighters and other emergency responders”.

“It is our assessment that FRNSW and other emergency services in NSW do not currently and will not foreseeably have the capability or the capacity in outer suburban Sydney to provide safe intervention in [Sydney Metro] tunnels where the cross-passage spacing is greater than 240 metres,” it said in correspondence.

Underscoring the extent of the dispute, Fire Rescue NSW said in the correspondence last year that it “does not agree with Sydney Metro that it is acceptable to create a subterranean environment where emergency services are unable to intervene in the event of an emergency however unlikely”.

However, Fire and Rescue NSW assistant commissioner Trent Curtin said it had reached agreement with Sydney Metro on Wednesday to implement the 240-metre Australian standard for cross-passage spacings.

“FRNSW will continue to work with Sydney Metro to ensure the safety design principles in the Australian standards are met,” he said.

A Sydney Metro spokeswoman said both agencies had agreed to cross-passage spacing of about 240 metres except in areas where such a distance was not possible due to ground conditions or water pressure.

“Continued collaboration between both agencies has led to an outcome that ensures the safety of emergency services personnel, commuters, railway staff and construction workers,” she said.

Fire Brigade Employees’ Union state secretary Leighton Drury welcomed the about-turn by Sydney Metro, saying tunnel cross-passages every 240 metres would now make them more suitable for emergency workers in an incident. “This is a significant victory for emergency services and the travelling public,” he said.

The union had been pressuring the government for weeks to compel Sydney Metro to build emergency exits 240 metres apart on the new rail lines.

A risk assessment by Sydney Metro two years ago calculated that 44 extra cross-passages will need to be built for Metro West if spacings are at 240 metre intervals, and an additional 23 for the new airport line. Each cross-passage was estimated at the time to cost about $1.5 million.
So with metro, staffing levels have been reduced and they wanted to identify further reductions in the form of emergency provision facilities... would like to see people put on some fire brigade uniform to test such feasibility for themselves in person to understand consequences that grown ups have to face and get sense of the real world
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

240 metres is an Australian standard, not a mandate. 500 metres is commonly used overseas. If the planning is based on 8 car (160 metre) trains that the lines are mostly designed for, the furthest that a train can be from a 500 metre-spaced cross passage is 170 metres, basically a train length. A 6 car train will be 190 metres away, a four car train 210 metres away. At 240 metres, an 8 car train would be maximum 40 metres (two car lengths) from a cross passage, a 6 car train will be 60 metres ( three car lengths) away and a 4 car train will be 80 metres away (four car lengths).

I think Metro West is likely to have 8 car trains and Western Sydney Metro will have 4 car. The latter would be a case for 240 metre spacing, not so sure about the former but it's been decided. Nevertheless, not quite the picture that's conveyed in the media coverage.
Randomness
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:17 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Anything with an Zf Ecomat
Location: Around the 920

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Randomness »

More exits would mean higher throughput in case of an evacuation though. Would be important for time critical situations like a fire that would need people evacuated before someone succumbs to smoke inhalation or burns. It would also help when an exit may be blocked for whatever reason.

EDIT: https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/25/jonhenley

Article on the Gotthard Road Tunnel Fire, mentioned the Mt Blanc fire and exits being every “250yd” = 220m
Transtopic
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:50 pm 240 metres is an Australian standard, not a mandate. 500 metres is commonly used overseas. If the planning is based on 8 car (160 metre) trains that the lines are mostly designed for, the furthest that a train can be from a 500 metre-spaced cross passage is 170 metres, basically a train length. A 6 car train will be 190 metres away, a four car train 210 metres away. At 240 metres, an 8 car train would be maximum 40 metres (two car lengths) from a cross passage, a 6 car train will be 60 metres ( three car lengths) away and a 4 car train will be 80 metres away (four car lengths).

I think Metro West is likely to have 8 car trains and Western Sydney Metro will have 4 car. The latter would be a case for 240 metre spacing, not so sure about the former but it's been decided. Nevertheless, not quite the picture that's conveyed in the media coverage.
So by your reasoning, an Australian Standard can be routinely ignored if it doesn't suit the proponent. Imagine the chaos in the building industry if Australian Standards were considered optional, like say, only having access to a fire escape on every alternate floor instead of every floor in a high rise building. They're there for a reason and what happens overseas is irrelevant.

A project still has to receive planning approval and other government agencies like Fire and Rescue NSW will have some input during the exhibition period. If the Planning Department waives compliance with the Australian Standard without just cause, in this case the cross passage spacing, and in the face of issues raised by Fire and Rescue NSW, it would be derelict in its duty.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Planning approval has already been issued. What's happened is a negotiated compromise outcome. So much of the Western Sydney Metro is above ground that it's not a major issue. The West Metro is another matter.
Transtopic
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:10 pm Planning approval has already been issued. What's happened is a negotiated compromise outcome. So much of the Western Sydney Metro is above ground that it's not a major issue. The West Metro is another matter.
All the more reason why the Planning Department should be condemned for granting approval, when no doubt it would have been aware of the issues raised by Fire and Rescue NSW beforehand. Fire and safety is such a critical issue on any major project, especially on underground railways and roads and it beggars belief that this wasn't sorted out earlier before approval was granted. The Airport Line (not WSA) had to be upgraded before any increase in frequencies will be permitted. Sydney Metro seems to be running the show and can do what it likes, but thankfully, it has now been brought to heal, just in time for the election.
tonyp
Posts: 12340
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Transtopic wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:24 pm
tonyp wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:10 pm Planning approval has already been issued. What's happened is a negotiated compromise outcome. So much of the Western Sydney Metro is above ground that it's not a major issue. The West Metro is another matter.
All the more reason why the Planning Department should be condemned for granting approval, when no doubt it would have been aware of the issues raised by Fire and Rescue NSW beforehand. Fire and safety is such a critical issue on any major project, especially on underground railways and roads and it beggars belief that this wasn't sorted out earlier before approval was granted. The Airport Line (not WSA) had to be upgraded before any increase in frequencies will be permitted. Sydney Metro seems to be running the show and can do what it likes, but thankfully, it has now been brought to heal, just in time for the election.
Fire and Rescue was consulted and gave its approval. The present issue is coming from the union.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”