Projects & Discussion | SYDNEY | General Public Transport Thread - Page 889 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > OZScrapers > Urban Spaces > Transportation

Transportation Trains, planes and automobiles.


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 November 8th, 2019, 06:04 AM   #17761
OZ Rails
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,693
Likes (Received): 480

Quote:
Originally Posted by mandonov View Post
I guess I'm just weary of reading between the lines to grand plans which may amount to nothing.

I'm concerned with the potential dismantling of sectorisation though. Currently T4 feels little to no effect from any disruptions to T8, but if South Coast and T8 were to begin sharing the Illawarra Locals then the smallest disruption can make it go tits up.

The Airport Line is only slated for an upgrade to 15tph, which means the rest of the T8 will be going via Sydenham and be sharing with the SCO. They might choose to separate operations of the express and local East Hills tracks, but then that means Campbelltown services will either need to run slow via the Airport or fast to Sydney Terminal at all times and become an integrated sector with T4 and the SCO.

It would be great if Bondi to Hurstville was spun off into it's own independent line to compensate, but Cronulla has already been promised 2 of the 5 extra trains to Bondi enabled by this project meaning interdependence will remain for the next decade at least.
It's a fair call to not get too excited about unannounced plans but it just makes sense. On the other hand, the Hurstville change doesn't make sense otherwise. It's not exactly a grand plan either. In the scheme of things it's just a string of smaller projects that will make use of currently wasted capacity. It's the Metro that pulls it all together IMO. I think if they will gradually build this in stages it's doable before the Metro makes it to Sydenham.
OZ Rails no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old November 8th, 2019, 06:40 AM   #17762
mandonov
Sure, Jan...
 
mandonov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Sydney/Newcastle
Posts: 3,342
Likes (Received): 1858

Quote:
Originally Posted by OZ Rails View Post
It's a fair call to not get too excited about unannounced plans but it just makes sense. On the other hand, the Hurstville change doesn't make sense otherwise. It's not exactly a grand plan either. In the scheme of things it's just a string of smaller projects that will make use of currently wasted capacity. It's the Metro that pulls it all together IMO. I think if they will gradually build this in stages it's doable before the Metro makes it to Sydenham.
Exactly, these current projects are to be complete by 2021 according to the docs, so it will be interesting to see what the next phase includes.
__________________
Newcastle Development Map

OZ Rails liked this post
mandonov no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 02:14 PM   #17763
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowboard99 View Post
This is not true, the below quoted posts from a couple of pages back show how you can separate the Mains and Illawarra through Redfern and into Sydney Terminal without dramatically changing the layout at Redfern.
Sorry but hornetfig does not actually describe what he means by..

"So, with a lot of reconstruction both north and south of Redfern you could put platforms 1-4 at Redfern for Sydney Yard use and platforms 5-10 into use for flying junctions/Central Electric access."

While its true that there is an existing path from Redfern platforms 3+4 to Central yard, there is no existing path from the Illawarra tracks to platforms 3+4. And its not explained precisely what would be involved in creating one.

Also there is a question of what is easier.. Removing platforms and slewing tracks, or creating new tunnels/bridges? In any case when I skimmed that earlier I'd originally thought that hornetfig was actually proposing to remove platforms/slew tracks since the alternatives don't make sense.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 02:26 PM   #17764
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by L2 View Post
Stanmore platform 1 must be close to the most useless on the network!
That's a tough call

(a lot of competition for useless platforms)
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 02:30 PM   #17765
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddyb View Post
Here is a conference to get people out their cars with public transport https://www.tunneltalk.com/Conferenc...sportation.php
Buy me a ticket to Frankfurt Eddy and I'll send you a nice Xmas card
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 02:51 PM   #17766
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtD View Post
I'm really keen on the idea of re-jigging the layout between Erskenville and Redfern like hornetfig described. It's the cheapest, fastest way to get an extra track pair into Central (it'll still take a year to build since it'll have to be done in a series of weekend possessions).

The paths through Redfern are all needed. Whether or not you'd still need all the platforms is a different question - which lines should stop at Redfern, and which ones shouldn't? There's no answer that pleases everyone. But it's academic, I doubt there's any appetite to remove platforms.
Again, hornetfig didn't really describe how this could be done. Now for clarity I'll go through what I think is possible..

1. If the purpose is to get from the Up Illawarra Local and Down Illawarra Local to Central terminus, then the most expedient solution is simply to build a flat crossover between the Illawarra locals and the Illawarra mains immediately north of the junction for the Eastern Suburbs line.

That way trains on the Illawarra locals which are the westernmost pair of tracks at Erskineville can cross over onto the Illawarra tracks at a point where they won't interfere with Eastern Suburbs line trains. They can then use the Illawarra dive and pass through Redfern platforms 1+2 as per usual. That's the simplest and most expedient method.

2. If you don't have a crossover from the Illawarra locals to the Illawarra mains then the present situation is that from the Illawarra locals you can access Redfern platforms 7+8, or if you switch across a flat junction you can access platforms 5+6 whilst interfering with the inner west locals.

Now you can cross over, north of Redfern from platforms 5+6 to Central terminus. However this means crossing paths with not only the locals but the suburbans. Is anyone here seriously proposing committing this particular atrocity? Snowboard?

3. If you don't want to through those flat junctions then you're up for a bunch of concrete. You could for instance build a viaduct that takes the Illawarra locals over all the other tracks and then a merge with the mains. You could in the process replace the present Illawarra merge (make the tunnels obsolete). And you have the freedom to crib space from the old rail yards/sheds.

4. Same theme, build a tunnel so the Illawarra locals come out in Central yard. Getting expensive here.

And if you want to get rid of the merge entirely and allow South Coast line trains freedom to access their own platforms at Central then you use option 1 above and then you demolish Redfern platforms 1,2,3 and slew some tracks and there you have it. Of course the new concourse (and probably heritage) will lock in the current platform footprints, so you're basically stuck with option 1 plus keeping the merge.

For what should be fairly obvious reasons, the merge itself doesn't bother me.




Edit: So I'm not accused of simply ignoring hornetfig's suggestion, here is my take on what I think he is actually proposing.

1. Build a crossover from the Illawarra locals to the Illawarra mains just north of the junction for the ESL.
2. Build two crossovers from the suburban tracks to the local tracks and from the local tracks to the Illawarra locals tracks close to the western end of Redfern.

Now the locals can use platforms 7 + 8 at Redfern and the suburbans can use platforms 5+6 at Redfern.

3. Build two more crossovers so that the locals and suburbans can cross back to their original tracks just shy of the Cleveland Street bridge.

This means building two tight, slow crossovers in order for them to fit into the space between the bridge and existing crossovers that allow the suburbans and locals access to Central terminal.

4. Re-engineering the Illawarra dives to go to Redfern platforms 3+4 and at the same time slew north and re-engineer the mains tracks as they head into Redfern platforms 1+2.

So yeah, a lot of musical platforms, a lot of passing of tight crossovers and worst of all, it would be only slightly preferable to a red hot poker up the ass in terms of the cost, disruption and length of time it would take.

Last edited by zoomwhoosh; November 8th, 2019 at 03:38 PM.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 03:44 PM   #17767
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by OZ Rails View Post
It's a fair call to not get too excited about unannounced plans but it just makes sense. On the other hand, the Hurstville change doesn't make sense otherwise. It's not exactly a grand plan either. In the scheme of things it's just a string of smaller projects that will make use of currently wasted capacity. It's the Metro that pulls it all together IMO. I think if they will gradually build this in stages it's doable before the Metro makes it to Sydenham.
I'll wait and see what is revealed.

As far as I'm concerned the best use of the existing four tracks from Erskineville through to Hurstville is to reserve one pair (the eastern tracks) for the Eastern Suburbs line and reserve the other pair (the western tracks) for the South Coast line. And run all of T8 through the airport. And service Eskineville and St Peters with the Eastern Suburbs line.

Plus the crossover I mentioned above which is north of the ESL junction and thus there is no interference.

All of this means South Coast line trains get a clear run. And there is really no need for any timetable complexity north of Hurstville. Just run all the Hurstville terminators all stops and have every train on the other track pair stop Hurstville, Kogarah, Sydenham and Central only.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 04:00 PM   #17768
snowboard99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney / New York
Posts: 1,479
Likes (Received): 736

I think everyone reading this understood what was proposed.

The Illawarra mains, from the dive, become Redefern platforms 1+2. The mains from the west become 3+4, the Suburbans 5+6 and the locals 7+8.

No need for the crossovers to be slow if done well.
__________________

AtD, mandonov, DAJAN, hornetfig liked this post
snowboard99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 05:16 PM   #17769
df1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 228
Likes (Received): 98

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoomwhoosh View Post
As far as I'm concerned the best use of the existing four tracks from Erskineville through to Hurstville is to reserve one pair (the eastern tracks) for the Eastern Suburbs line and reserve the other pair (the western tracks) for the South Coast line. And run all of T8 through the airport. And service Eskineville and St Peters with the Eastern Suburbs line.
I think this is what will (or at least should) happen in the short term. As you said all it would require is the crossover north of Erskineville. The only problem is what happens after Hurstville. If you run Cronulla trains onto the Eastern Suburbs line you have a mess of conflicting mergers south of Hurstville (which the proposed turnback would not resolve). If you run them into Sydney Terminal you're probably overloading the two-track bottleneck at Redfern.

Hence hornetfig's longer-term proposal for track-slewing at Redfern, which would separate the Western line mains from the Illawarra mains and thus double the effective capacity of Sydney Terminal. Technically this would not be a very difficult project: once the suburban tracks are slewed (which could probably be done with successive weekend shutdowns), you only need to re-direct the up Western line main track that currently runs north of the Illawarra tunnel portal to head to the south of the portal. A short crossover west of the portal would do this.

Then keep the two lines separate all the way into the terminal, with Platforms 1-7 handling south coast services (and possibly also Main South long-distance trains), while 8-14 would be dedicate to the Western and Northern lines. Some re-arranging of the tracks in the station throat would be necessary for this, but it would be a very manageable project.

No trains would stop at Redfern platforms 1-4, but as far as I can tell there is no need to demolish the platforms.

All in all this would be by far the cheapest way to introduce capacity for an extra 20tph into the city.

P.S. This could be done in tandem with quadding Hurstville-Sutherland (some tunnelling between Hurstville and Mortdale may be necessary for this), which would then allow for a self-contained metro line running Bondi-Cronulla, and all other services (Waterfall/South Coast) heading into Sydney Terminal
__________________

AtD liked this post
df1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:06 PM   #17770
DAJAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,368
Likes (Received): 1254

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoomwhoosh View Post
Sorry but hornetfig does not actually describe what he means by..

"So, with a lot of reconstruction both north and south of Redfern you could put platforms 1-4 at Redfern for Sydney Yard use and platforms 5-10 into use for flying junctions/Central Electric access."

While its true that there is an existing path from Redfern platforms 3+4 to Central yard, there is no existing path from the Illawarra tracks to platforms 3+4. And its not explained precisely what would be involved in creating one.

Also there is a question of what is easier.. Removing platforms and slewing tracks, or creating new tunnels/bridges? In any case when I skimmed that earlier I'd originally thought that hornetfig was actually proposing to remove platforms/slew tracks since the alternatives don't make sense.
I thought this was explained, but here's a more precise rundown......

The idea is, that the Illawarra Dive portals would continue to use Redfern 1-2.
Western Mains would be slewed use Redfern 3-4, (on the stretch above the Illawarra Dive tunnels, adjacent to Carriageworks)
Western Suburbans would be slewed to use Redfern 5-6
Western Locals would be slewed to use Redfern 7-8
Illawarra Locals (by name only, it's the western pair taking the expresses) would be slewed onto the Illawarra Dive portals, as well as the surface track between the portals which continues onto Redfern 9-10.
Illawarra Mains no longer have a dedicated surface path through Redfern, (hasn't needed it for the last 40 years, since it all goes into the ESR tunnels)

Immediately south of Cleveland St, most of them slew back again:
Redfern 1-2 into the western fan of ST.
Redfern 3-4 into the eastern fan of ST.
Redfern 5-6 slewed onto the westernmost flying junction pair for North Shore
Redfern 7-8 slewed onto the 2nd-westernmost flying junction pair for Circle via Town Hall
Redfern 9-10 can remain on the easternmost flying junction pair into Central 21-22-23-24.
The 2nd-easternmost flying junction pair can be redundant, since it merges with the easternmost pair just before central anyway.

As pointed out before, we don't know if this is all happening. They might go the cheap option and continue to force all Intercity's (South Coast, Blue Mountains, Central Coast /Newcastle) to squeeze into Redfern 1-2 before ST.

The only bit we can take as a given, is the Illawarra Locals will be slewed onto the Illawarra Dive portals, so South Coast trains do not occupy an ESL slot in order to reach ST as they currently do. (for the reasons I said in post 17757)

EDIT.......
When I wrote this, I missed the fact that Snowboard had explained the same thing (in a concise summary) 5 hrs earlier at 1am EDST.

Last edited by DAJAN; November 9th, 2019 at 05:57 AM.
DAJAN no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:13 PM   #17771
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowboard99 View Post
I think everyone reading this understood what was proposed.

The Illawarra mains, from the dive, become Redefern platforms 1+2. The mains from the west become 3+4, the Suburbans 5+6 and the locals 7+8.

No need for the crossovers to be slow if done well.
As I pointed out the crossovers from the locals and suburbans that allow access to Central station constrain the new crossovers to right before the Cleveland Street bridge. Thus making them fairly tight. Or you have to move the former closer to Redfern or delete them.

It is a massively complex and disruptive process all the same.and in my view the long term solution would see Central terminus being used less.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:31 PM   #17772
df1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 228
Likes (Received): 98

That the suburban tracks need to be slewed back after Redfern implies that some work does indeed need to be done between the station and Cleveland St, but it's pretty simple stuff. No need for dives, tunnels or flyovers. And there's no need to provide local/suburban tracks with access to the terminal.

And Sydney Terminal should be used MORE, not less. With the relatively modest work proposed above you can double the number of trains heading into the terminal, from 20tph to 40tph, and even more if the signalling is improved.

There are 14 platforms sitting there begging to be used to their full capacity. It would be woefully wasteful not to do so.
__________________

AtD liked this post
df1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:32 PM   #17773
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

As for the Cronulla line..

I don't see a huge issue with Cronulla trains crossing a flat junction in order to merge with Hurstville starters at Hurstville.

The conflict can be managed. But it does mean some padding and it does mean some interlock between the ESL timetable and the Cronulla/SC timetable. Not a good thing.

Completely irresolvable without new track.

The other big problem here is the shitty level of service given to the minor stations between Sutherland and Hurstville. That drives people away. Its done because of the gaps you need in the timetable you need to squeeze express trains.

Also it forces every other train from Cronulla to run all stops and that makes a slow trip even slower. Its no wonder people drive from the Shire and the A1 is massively congested. Its because trains down there are hopelessly slow.

There is of course a much better solution that cuts 20 minutes off the Cronulla trip and provides 100% isolation between the Cronulla line, the South Coast line and the Eastern Suburbs line - and doesn't involve parking more trains at Central.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:34 PM   #17774
df1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 228
Likes (Received): 98

In other words, in terms of the capacity it releases vs the modest cost involved, I doubt there is a viable rail infrastructure project in all of Sydney that would have a better CBR than this idea.
df1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:37 PM   #17775
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

I don't mind seeing Central terminus used more as an interim measure. However the present "bottleneck" at Redfern sees at most (tell me if I'm wrong) 12 trains arriving before 9am. 8 from CCN. 4 from BMT and none from SCO. Its got a bit of spare capacity as it stands. The limit is probably around 24 with some attention to signals.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2019, 09:49 PM   #17776
df1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 228
Likes (Received): 98

If you want to maximise the number of trains reaching the city then this project is pretty much unavoidable. Otherwise you have an unnecessary limitation caused by the bottleneck at Redfern, which reduces throughput by at least 20tph.
df1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2019, 01:13 AM   #17777
AtD
Bigger is better
 
AtD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,043
Likes (Received): 3316

~20 more trains per hour into Central without the need for any viaducts, tunnels or other big engineering projects. Bargain.

Also I'll just add that there's the NSW TrainLink Southern line that comes from Sydney Terminal, though the Illawarra Dive, through platforms 5 and 6 at Sydenham, then switch to the Illawarra local north of Tempe, then switch to the East Hills line.

If the Illwarra main is shared with South Coast / T4-Waterfall / T8-via-Sydenham and Southern trains, then it would be ideal to have a flyover at Wolli Creek. And also more platforms at Wolli Creek. And integrated retail in an over-station development. And blackjack. And hookers.
__________________
How popular is public transport in Australian cities?
https://www.skyscrapercity.com/showp...&postcount=703
AtD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2019, 04:39 AM   #17778
mandonov
Sure, Jan...
 
mandonov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Sydney/Newcastle
Posts: 3,342
Likes (Received): 1858

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtD View Post
If the Illwarra main is shared with South Coast / T4-Waterfall / T8-via-Sydenham and Southern trains, then it would be ideal to have a flyover at Wolli Creek. And also more platforms at Wolli Creek. And integrated retail in an over-station development. And blackjack. And hookers.
In my mind we'd need a quad to Sutherland and Glenfield, plus a Wolli Creek flyover and platforms, in addition to the Redfern stuff for this to actually work smoothly whilst maintaining separate sectors.

It would be fantastic to have this southern express sector of limited stops trains to the south and southwest, but the quads will be necessary to get the full benefits of a multi-tiered network without a hit to resiliency.
__________________
Newcastle Development Map

ArtNouveau liked this post
mandonov no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2019, 06:10 AM   #17779
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by df1 View Post
If you want to maximise the number of trains reaching the city then this project is pretty much unavoidable. Otherwise you have an unnecessary limitation caused by the bottleneck at Redfern, which reduces throughput by at least 20tph.
I recall reading a thesis somewhere that proposed removing the bottleneck. According to what I read, tge maximum theoretical capacity of Central's terminal platforms was 34 per hour. I can't recall the detail.

With the "bottleneck" as it is, you could easily run 20 tph and quite probably 24 tph. That's double what we get now.

Now tell me. How many additional trains do you want to terminate and from where do they originate?

How do you deal with the knock-on effects? I could list quite a few - including the fact that Central Walk may cope with a doubling of terminating trains at Central but may not cope beyond that. Take a look at the passenger flow/congestion details in the EIS.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2019, 06:14 AM   #17780
zoomwhoosh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,561
Likes (Received): 1496

Quote:
Originally Posted by df1 View Post
If you want to maximise the number of trains reaching the city then this project is pretty much unavoidable. Otherwise you have an unnecessary limitation caused by the bottleneck at Redfern, which reduces throughput by at least 20tph.
I recall reading a thesis somewhere that proposed removing the bottleneck. According to what I read, the maximum theoretical capacity of Central's terminal platforms was 34 per hour. I can't recall the detail.

With the "bottleneck" as it is, you could easily run 20 tph and quite probably 24 tph. That's double what we get now.

Now tell me. How many additional trains do you want to terminate and from where do they originate?

How do you deal with the knock-on effects? I could list quite a few - including the fact that Central Walk may cope with a doubling of terminating trains at Central but may not cope beyond that. Take a look at the passenger flow/congestion details in the EIS.

Then ask how many people can you crush load onto the metro at Central. Quite a lot for sure but there are limits. It may well be only moderately loaded from Bankstown. But if it goes to Liverpool?

Anyhow for starters where do those additional 8-12 Central terminating trains come from? The ones we could run tommorrow.

Last edited by zoomwhoosh; November 9th, 2019 at 06:34 AM.
zoomwhoosh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Tags
maglev bus to caboolture, mandurahboyz

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Penang Transportation Plan rizalhakim Pengangkutan 3777 Yesterday 02:45 PM
London - Full Summary of Projects 28 SE9 London Metro Area 103 Yesterday 12:36 AM
Projectos e Notícias de Oeiras Fern Projectos 2102 November 11th, 2019 09:03 PM
"Mорско око" - Форумен дрон за Варна p0ck0 Varna 849 October 28th, 2019 06:56 PM
[Bratislava] Full Summary of Projects alien Bratislava 636 October 3rd, 2018 01:45 PM


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us