daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 16th, 2014, 09:55 AM   #281
nameless dude
Registered User
 
nameless dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,071
Likes (Received): 838

I'm actually not too sure if you can distinguish rapid transit/metro with heavy/commuter rail judging only by distance. If I'm not mistaken heavy rail is usually standard gauge and passenger trains would sometimes run with non-passenger vehicles (eg freight trains) on the same track. It may/may not be entirely grade separated, resulting in level crossings, the system might not always be electrified, the trains are usually larger and longer and are heavier being that they're designed to satisfy tougher impact standards. Whereas with rapid transit it's built exclusively for passenger trains only, is almost always grade separated and electrified, the trains are lighter and can accelerate and brake quicker and would usually have more sets of doors per carriage to allow for quicker boarding and alighting, all of which equates to more trains per hour. I wouldn't get too hung up on these definitions though, depending on the characteristics of each system the differences can often be blurred.

I wouldn't worry too much about distance, it's only a matter of tailoring the seats/seating configuration to the need. Keep in mind that throughout the 37km length of the line there's only 13 stations, and the trains are being designed to run at speeds of up to 130km/h as opposed to your typical metro speeds of ~80km/h (I believe?).

Whether a good example or not, perhaps the NWRL passenger experience would be better compared with San Francisco's BART. Or Hong Kong's Tung Chung and West Rail Lines.

As explained few posts above, the case for rapid transit on the NWRL is not so much based on distance from the CBD, but rather on commuting patterns (see the link in that post for explanation). Note that the NWRL, especially once linked up to the CBD via a new harbour crossing, runs through much of the largest and most dense concentration of employment hubs in Sydney. And as already alluded to in the post above, frequencies can be adjusted depending on demand. Importantly this rapid transit system is being built to cater to demand not just now but well into the future as population and employment increases and population density around the area increases drastically, especially around the train stations.

And until the second harbour crossing is built, at Chatswood it's nothing more than a simple cross-platform interchange. A common occurrence in daily commutes around the world.
__________________

Hegemonic liked this post

Last edited by nameless dude; September 16th, 2014 at 05:22 PM.
nameless dude no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 16th, 2014, 12:35 PM   #282
Hegemonic
Registered User
 
Hegemonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 936
Likes (Received): 366

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
Thought someone would say that. But of course irrelevant for a couple of reasons.

Firstly you seem to have just gone to Wiki and got the total line length, never mind of course all 3 lines you mention have at least one branch line, which increases the line mileage, but doesn't necessarily increase the distance one travels or the end to end distance of the lines.

For example it would be rare for someone to travel regularly from Upminster to anywhere beyond about Victoria, a distance of about 25miles as the crow flies so about the same as the Sydney CBR to Kellyville. Though you do realise that the District line is closer to heavy rail than it is to metro? Same with the Metropolitan line in London too.

Secondly very few would, on a regular basis travel end to end on any of these lines. Whereas the NWRL is the kind of line where people will go point to point from the ends to the City. Well point to a 3rd party point (Chatswood) before then getting on another train to finish of the journey.

All could be simply avoided by making this a full heavy rail line and extend existing Chatswood to Epping services westwards, and then adding a new metro line from Chatswood through to City and beyond. Basically keep metro to the area bounded by by the A3 road which is where it belongs in a place like Sydney.
There's nothing wrong with wiki, professor for quick reference.

At the end of the day when this project is realized to it's full vision it will also be a through line also

Secondly, not all people will be using this service end to end, as it will be passing through business hubs like Bella Vista, Castle Hill, Macquarie Uni before getting to Chatswood and beyond eventually.

Furthermore, all the people who reside within the A3 can look forward to a future of tram networks which the people of Randwick can keep an eye out for soon.

At the end of the day call it what you will Metro, Rapid transit network anything is better than the decrepit Sydney Trains network and clear separation with that system is a step forward.

Last edited by Hegemonic; September 16th, 2014 at 12:52 PM.
Hegemonic no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2014, 12:47 PM   #283
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hegemonic View Post
There's nothing wrong with wiki, professor for quick reference.

At the end of the day when this project is realized to it's full vision it will also be a through line also

Secondly, not all people will be using this service end to end, as it will be passing through business hubs like Bella Vista, Castle Hill, Macquarie Uni before getting to Chatswood and beyond eventually.

Furthermore, all the people who reside within the A3 can look forward to a future of tram networks which the people of Randwick can keep an eye out for soon.

At the end of the day call it what you will Metro, Rapid transit network anything is better than the decrepit Sydney Trains network and clear separation with that system is a step forward.
Indeed there is nothing wrong with wiki, how do you think I know what you were quoting. The issue I had was the context. Sure the Central line is 74km in length, but that is meaningless without context such that the central line has 4 branches (Epping, Hainault Loop, Eealing Broadway and Ruislip) and is never, if rarely used for end to end journeys.

As for using the services end to end, sure many will stop elsewhere, but many will be using it end to end, Sydney still has a disproportionate number of people that commute to the CBD, North Sydney and Chatswood all of which are a fair distance from Kellyville. But the other intermediate points they are already served are they not by the existing rail line.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2014, 01:24 PM   #284
city_thing
Put it in your mouth
 
city_thing's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Melbourne.
Posts: 7,128
Likes (Received): 883

So Alstom is making the trains? Do they have a factory in NSW?

I think they have one in Bendigo or Ballarat, some rust belt Victorian city maybe. It'd be nice if Melbourne could order a few of the train sets too. The current Metro fleet is pretty shite.
__________________
Calling occupants of interplanetary craft...
city_thing no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2014, 01:44 PM   #285
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
So Alstom is making the trains? Do they have a factory in NSW?

I think they have one in Bendigo or Ballarat, some rust belt Victorian city maybe. It'd be nice if Melbourne could order a few of the train sets too. The current Metro fleet is pretty shite.
Alstom does not have a factory in Australia, let alone Australia. It did have a presence in Ballarat, where it fitted out, not built the Xtraps for Melbourne, but that has since been sold or leased to someone else.

Besides for 20 odd trains of what one would hope is a stock design it wouldn't make sense to build them here.

As for Melbourne, even though the name of the operator is Metrotrains, it is not a metro service, it is heavy rail and needs heavy rail trains, not metro style trains.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2014, 01:49 PM   #286
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8798

I don't think he meant "metro" as in a subway/metro/tube system, more the operator. I guess to avoid confusion he could say MTM? It was a stupid rebrand on the part of MTR to call the network "metro" if you ask me.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 18th, 2014, 04:22 PM   #287
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by Svartmetall View Post
I don't think he meant "metro" as in a subway/metro/tube system, more the operator. I guess to avoid confusion he could say MTM? It was a stupid rebrand on the part of MTR to call the network "metro" if you ask me.
Yeah I realise that, my point was the trains for Sydney would not be suitable for Melbourne which is a heavy rail system so can and should use larger trains.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2014, 10:12 PM   #288
mw123
Registered User
 
mw123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,818
Likes (Received): 2671

South West Rail Link construction complete, services to start in early 2015

NSW Premier and Minister for Western Sydney Mike Baird and Minister for Transport Gladys Berejiklian today announced construction of the new 11.4 kilometre South West Rail Link is now complete.

Mr Baird and Ms Berejiklian also announced the $2.1 billion project is on track to have customers boarding trains early next year, during an inspection of the new Edmondson Park Station today.

“I am very pleased to announce the South West Rail Link, between Glenfield and Leppington, has been completed $300 million under budget and a year ahead of schedule, and we are on target to have Sydney Trains services start in early 2015,” Mr Baird said.



SOUTH WEST RAIL LINK CONSTRUCTION FACTS
-Construction of Edmondson Park Station and Leppington Station commenced in March 2012 and is now complete.
-Leppington Station - 3,500 cubic metres of concrete, 750 tonnes of steel reinforcement and 200 tonnes of structural steel used in construction.
-Edmondson Park Station - 3,000 cubic metres of concrete, 650 tonnes of steel reinforcement and 150 tonnes of structural steel used in construction.
-31.35 km of track has been installed across the project.
-53,000 sleepers have been laid.
-100,000 tonnes of ballast is in place.
-Construction of all 14 bridges on the project is now complete (construction of bridges commenced in March 2012).
-The new train stabling facility at the end of the line at Rossmore will have the capacity to stable up to 20 trains.

Transport for NSW

Towards-Edmonson-Park-station_West-from-Bardia-St_Glenfield_South-West-Rail-Link_08-06-2014_IMG_01254 by chrisadowns, on Flickr

East-from-Rickard-Road_South-West-Rail-Link_08-06-2014_IMG_01144 by chrisadowns, on Flickr
__________________

dimlys1994 liked this post
mw123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2014, 10:25 PM   #289
mw123
Registered User
 
mw123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,818
Likes (Received): 2671

Planning starts to convert Epping to Chatswood rail line to rapid transit

Minister for Transport Gladys Berejiklian announced community consultation will now begin for a six to seven month closure of the Epping to Chatswood rail line in 2018-19 to deliver fully-automated rapid transit services for customers every four minutes.

The NSW Government signed the $3.7 billion North West Rail Link operations contract this week, which includes brand new modern trains, eight new stations and upgrades to five existing stations between Epping and Chatswood.

Ms Berejiklian said with the operations contract now awarded, preparations can begin to upgrade the existing line between Epping and Chatswood – delivering new, fast, frequent and automated rapid transit services.

Despite the temporary closure being more than four years away, the project team is starting work with the community now to get the interim transport arrangements right.

"When Sydney’s new rapid transit services start in the first half of 2019, 15 trains an hour will run in both directions between Epping and Chatswood during the peak – almost four times as many as today," Ms Berejiklian said.

“For example a customer at North Ryde heading to the city will see a rapid transit train every four minutes in the peak, compared to a train every 15 minutes today.”

To convert the existing suburban line to next-generation rapid transit, major upgrades will be needed, including overhauling the stations, installing 26km of cabling, power and signalling systems and customer improvements such as platform screen doors.

The five existing stations along the line – at Epping, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, North Ryde and Chatswood – will have screen doors along the full length of the platforms to keep people and objects away from the tracks, improving customer safety and allowing trains to get in and out of stations much faster, Ms Berejiklian said.


Transport for NSW


From TfNSW Twitter.
__________________

dimlys1994 liked this post
mw123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2014, 05:20 AM   #290
Myrtonos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 205
Likes (Received): 9

Fit for purpose?

Is metro really the right solution for the North West Rail link? EcoTransit thinks not. Sydney pioneered the double decker multiple unit train back in 1964 with double deck trailers, and 4 years later with double decker motor carriages as well. And almost evury other metropolis with both metro and suburban railways, and in every case where the suburban railway is all double decked, it was metro that came first. The Paris metro, for example, dates back to 1900 while the RER began in 1969. And line 14 is the only new metro line built since the RER began, and only to relieve congestion on RER line A. And the RER is all double decked.

__________________

MrAronymous liked this post
Myrtonos no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2014, 04:26 PM   #291
mw123
Registered User
 
mw123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,818
Likes (Received): 2671

The government claims that using heavy rail will require much deeper tunnels that will force some stations to be too deep to use escalators. Gradient across the harbour is a big issue.

Also, I don't think we could really have a skip stop service on this route. Exactly what stations would you skip? Epping is a major interchange station, Macquarie Park and Uni are important employment and education destinations, North Ryde is slated for massive residential development and Chatswood and North Sydney are major centres - after that, you're in the CBD. Try getting on a train at Macquarie University or Macquarie Park in peak hour - it is already like being stuck in a sardine tin with people who don't use the stairs because they will be shortly exiting the train at Epping or Chatswood.

Perhaps a reconfigured heavy rail network would have been an option with longitudinal seating or more doors but we would still have the problem of stations that are too deep.

Last edited by mw123; September 22nd, 2014 at 04:37 PM.
mw123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2014, 11:04 AM   #292
tunnel owl
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 751
Likes (Received): 440

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myrtonos View Post
Is metro really the right solution for the North West Rail link? EcoTransit thinks not... And the RER is all double decked.
RER all double decked? Did I missed something

Double-deck trains are not suitable for metrolike service. The dwelling time at stations is much to high to qualify them for a quick service. It´s more about offering a seat for long journeys wich is quite good for longer interurban rail.

Here in Germany S-Bahnsystems nearly completely avoid double-deck trains for that reasons. Zurichs S-Bahn uses them, but this is also not a metrolike service (though some people there might think it is).
tunnel owl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2014, 12:32 PM   #293
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8798

The RER in Paris is largely double-decked, or at least operates double-deck trains on the A, C, D and E. B is actually the outlier in that scenario.

The RER A is one of the busiest lines in Europe and it operates this stock (as I am sure you know already): http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MI_09#m...-_IMG_1560.jpg

The dwell times on these trains is not that different to the single deck trains that are still in service for parts of the RER A. It is still an incredibly dense service on the central lines (and even on the branches).

Quote:
Originally Posted by mw123 View Post
The government claims that using heavy rail will require much deeper tunnels that will force some stations to be too deep to use escalators. Gradient across the harbour is a big issue.

Perhaps a reconfigured heavy rail network would have been an option with longitudinal seating or more doors but we would still have the problem of stations that are too deep.
I find that a bit hard to swallow. Why would it have to be markedly deeper for double-deck trains? I don't quite follow the logic.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2014, 01:14 PM   #294
city_thing
Put it in your mouth
 
city_thing's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Melbourne.
Posts: 7,128
Likes (Received): 883

Do double decker trains have a lot more problems with gradients?

I thought the whole reason for changing trains was for more capacity ("metro like services") and to have different sized tunnels, so that this new system couldn't fall into the hands of the heavily unionised transport body that runs the rest of the system? That's why they're changing the size of the tunnels on the Epping to Chatswood portion that already exists.
__________________
Calling occupants of interplanetary craft...
city_thing no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2014, 01:27 PM   #295
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,532
Likes (Received): 21239

Why has Sydney demolished its monorail ?
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2014, 01:57 PM   #296
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8798

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
Do double decker trains have a lot more problems with gradients?

I thought the whole reason for changing trains was for more capacity ("metro like services") and to have different sized tunnels, so that this new system couldn't fall into the hands of the heavily unionised transport body that runs the rest of the system? That's why they're changing the size of the tunnels on the Epping to Chatswood portion that already exists.
I would assume the gradient issue is weight vs. power. More weight = more power required, I'm unsure. I do know that the Epping-Chatswood link has quite severe gradients and certain trains cannot run through the tunnel (unless this situation has changed).

You're probably right about the union, however, I don't buy the "higher capacity" given my RER A example. That line alone carries almost as many people per year as the entire CityRail network.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Why has Sydney demolished its monorail ?
Highly expensive white elephant that was not real transport in Sydney. The ticket prices were discouraging people from taking it and the ongoing running costs were too high.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2014, 05:21 AM   #297
Build It Up
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Sydney
Posts: 539
Likes (Received): 96

One key difference between RER double decker rolling stock and the double deckers used in Sydney is that the RER carriages have three doors per side per carriage instead of two. This improves the flow of passengers entering and exiting the carriages. The seated capacity of each RER carriage is lower which also tends to improve dwell times (seated passengers tend to take longer to disembark than standing ones).
Build It Up no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2014, 05:30 AM   #298
Nouvellecosse
~ Mysterious Entity ~
 
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, N.S.
Posts: 4,446
Likes (Received): 313

It isn't so much that seated passengers take longer to disembark as passengers can get up before they arrive at station; it's more that when a larger proportion of the train is devoted to seating - especially 3+2 seating - then the circulation in the train is poorer as the isles are narrower and people ave a harder time moving around when its crowded.
__________________
.
.
I always think of a new type of cologne brand when I see your name

"Nouvellecosse, by Calvin Klein. Take on the world!"

- MysticMcGoo
Nouvellecosse está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2014, 08:05 AM   #299
tunnel owl
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 751
Likes (Received): 440

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
It isn't so much that seated passengers take longer to disembark as passengers can get up before they arrive at station; it's more that when a larger proportion of the train is devoted to seating - especially 3+2 seating - then the circulation in the train is poorer as the isles are narrower and people ave a harder time moving around when its crowded.
A double-deck train with three very wide doors on each side of a coach like RER makes circulation at doors very quickly which is the key for short dwell times. But also longitudinal seating can be helpful. Thing to notice is space for handicaped persons.

If the way to the doors is too Long, passengers tend to stay at the doors, which is awful at rush-hours. Seems to be a matter of psychology.
tunnel owl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2014, 01:08 PM   #300
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8798

Quote:
Originally Posted by Build It Up View Post
One key difference between RER double decker rolling stock and the double deckers used in Sydney is that the RER carriages have three doors per side per carriage instead of two. This improves the flow of passengers entering and exiting the carriages. The seated capacity of each RER carriage is lower which also tends to improve dwell times (seated passengers tend to take longer to disembark than standing ones).
No, only on RER A. RER C and D all have two door formations, as do the Transilien trains that are double decked.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
sydney, tram

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium