According to the SMH today, the Tourism and Transport Forum has again called for a more reasonable charge for services to or from the Airport. They quote a paper from the NSW government in 2011 which put the value of Airport Link Company at $276 million. Unfortunately, this price would be increased due to the 70% patronage increase at Green Square and Mascot after the surcharge was removed as one of the last acts of the last state government. That should add around $56 million to the price, for $332 million plus inflation, less a couple of years life left in the asset.
If it can actually be bought at this price, they should absolutely go for it. Even Infrastructure NSW can see the need for lower fares to the Airport, in their "First things first" report. Why they aren't doing so requires a detailed explanation.
Showing posts with label rail. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rail. Show all posts
Monday, January 28, 2013
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Cityrail Marshalls
Cityrail have introduced Marshalls on Town Hall platform 3, as detailed in
this SMH report. This is an attempted solution to the capacity limitations on the Western and lower Northern Lines which run through this platform with limited space for intending passengers. A lot of the problem has been and remains people trying to board impeding people trying to get off. The reality is that Cityrail encourage this behaviour by blowing the whistle or playing the "Stand clear, doors closing" message while people are still trying to get off. This is an unprofessional and unacceptable practice which remains to this day. It no doubt contributes significantly to the low level of regard Cityrail is held by Sydneysiders.
This practice must end, forthwith!
this SMH report. This is an attempted solution to the capacity limitations on the Western and lower Northern Lines which run through this platform with limited space for intending passengers. A lot of the problem has been and remains people trying to board impeding people trying to get off. The reality is that Cityrail encourage this behaviour by blowing the whistle or playing the "Stand clear, doors closing" message while people are still trying to get off. This is an unprofessional and unacceptable practice which remains to this day. It no doubt contributes significantly to the low level of regard Cityrail is held by Sydneysiders.
This practice must end, forthwith!
Monday, July 9, 2012
Is Western Fast Rail back on the agenda?
As I previously blogged, the current government has made a number of apparently ill thought through and half baked announcements, firstly Richmond to Campbelltown then single deck metro from the North West to Chatswood. The questions seems to be why? I suggest that they have been softening up the voters for something they may not like. What that might be is a revitalisation of the Western Fast Rail privatised project. Reports from when the Liberals were still in opposition quoted the current transport minister as saying that the project should be looked at more seriously.
This is complete supposition; but you heard it here first!
This is complete supposition; but you heard it here first!
Thursday, July 5, 2012
CBD Enhancement dropped!
Unfortunately, it seems from recent documentation that the previously planned CBD enhancement from Eveleigh to Wynyard and beyond is to not proceed. This is a decision which means that there will not be much improvement in Cityrail for decades, particularly for the Western and Northern Lines.
Giving the Western Line its own path through the CBD would be best practice. It's the busiest line on the network, and busier than the North Shore line (counting the upper Northern Line), Illawarra Line and Eastern Suburbs Line all of which have their own path through the CBD. So why not separate the network out further which will help with allowing more and stricter sectorisation? That would get these passengers out of the current Town Hall and Wynyard significantly easing platform congestion and the new platforms should be able to be built wider than the existing platforms. Alternatively with what is known as bifurcation which means that there would be 4 additional platforms per station to reduce/remove dwell time in the CBD from being the capacity restriction. This would leave Parramatta dwell times as the limitation.
The above linked documentation mentions some restrictions which are either soon to be removed or can be. Numbers 3, 4 and 9 can be easily removed, they just choose not to. In the case of number 9 which the document details removing this does mean trains need to take a slower path, however, this limitation is solved by the CBD enhancement (formerly called the Western Express) as described above, as is number 7.
Such an unceremonious dumping deserves an explanation, however the linked document above seems to be an attempt to deflect the criticism rather than explain it. It does not refer at all to the plan to increase CBD capacity along the "Metro West" alignment as originally planned, but an alternative plan which had never been publicly proposed involving a Cityrail expansion along the "Metro Pitt" alignment, which would not help the Western Line.
I just wonder if they are pushing some agenda, and if so then what? Perhaps it is just to be different from the Keneally government's sensible Western Express plan.
Giving the Western Line its own path through the CBD would be best practice. It's the busiest line on the network, and busier than the North Shore line (counting the upper Northern Line), Illawarra Line and Eastern Suburbs Line all of which have their own path through the CBD. So why not separate the network out further which will help with allowing more and stricter sectorisation? That would get these passengers out of the current Town Hall and Wynyard significantly easing platform congestion and the new platforms should be able to be built wider than the existing platforms. Alternatively with what is known as bifurcation which means that there would be 4 additional platforms per station to reduce/remove dwell time in the CBD from being the capacity restriction. This would leave Parramatta dwell times as the limitation.
The above linked documentation mentions some restrictions which are either soon to be removed or can be. Numbers 3, 4 and 9 can be easily removed, they just choose not to. In the case of number 9 which the document details removing this does mean trains need to take a slower path, however, this limitation is solved by the CBD enhancement (formerly called the Western Express) as described above, as is number 7.
Such an unceremonious dumping deserves an explanation, however the linked document above seems to be an attempt to deflect the criticism rather than explain it. It does not refer at all to the plan to increase CBD capacity along the "Metro West" alignment as originally planned, but an alternative plan which had never been publicly proposed involving a Cityrail expansion along the "Metro Pitt" alignment, which would not help the Western Line.
I just wonder if they are pushing some agenda, and if so then what? Perhaps it is just to be different from the Keneally government's sensible Western Express plan.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Cityrail timetable proposals in recent news - Part 1
A Sydney Morning Herald article has reported that it is being suggested for a number of stations to lose their access to Town Hall, but the Cumberland Line is to be given an upgraded service and run through to Richmond. These changes are sure to be unpopular and reduce the effectiveness of Cityrail, so the question is why would it even be considered? One word: sectorisation. This means that parts of Cityrail can function independently of the whole, as has been all but achieved with the Illawarra and Eastern Suburbs lines. Cityrail branded this concept clearways a number of years back.
Basically, to have a strict sectorisation the Cumberland line would need to either be completely removed, or pushed into what is known as sector 2, meaning lines accessing the City Circle. This means that lines through Parramatta platforms 3 and 4 need to go to sector 2, and given that it is not possible to come from the Richmond line without accessing these lines, the Richmond line needs to go along for that ride. Since trains serving Harris Park, Wentworthville, Toongabbie and Pendle Hill normally only use Parramatta platforms 3 and 4, these trains would no longer be able to reach Central. Similarly, Clyde, Auburn, Lidcombe and Burwood would no longer have a single seat service to Parramatta. Clyde stops would need to be added to selected south line trains. The most popular peak pattern - All to Redfern/Parramatta/Blacktown/Mt Druitt all to Penrith would need to be slowed down significantly with probably 6 more stops. It's not entirely clear why the lower Northern line cannot run through Town Hall with sectorisation however, even with the conflicting move* between outbound interurbans and inbound suburbans north of Strathfield. It is also unclear how Blue Mountains line trains would operate at all if this is done.
This is sectorisation becoming the enemy of Cityrail doing a good job, rather than its friend, which it usually is. I feel this is being leaked now to soften up users of Cityrail for a timetable which isn't going to be liked. It is certainly true that the Western Line needs its own path through the CBD though, which should have been built before the Epping Chatswood Rail Link was.
What alternatives are there for 2013?
Alternative One:
Increase running into Sydney Terminal for the Western Line. It is unclear why there are still 3 (both directions combined) Springwood trains per day crossing the Harbour Bridge. This was done before the ECRL freed up a few paths across the Harbour Bridge so there is precedent.
Altenative Two:
Run additional lower Northern Line trains into Sydney Terminal. This is a satisfactory option for increasing the Northern Line which is incredibly overcrowded but does nothing for the Western Line, which is nearly as bad.
Alternative Three:
Run all lower northern line trains into Sydney Terminal. The existing trains should not be damaged in this way, even if increased in frequency. Varied stopping patterns cannot reasonably apply for the Western Line between Redfern and Parramatta so all my comments above would apply in that zone and about the Blue Mountains Line trains being virtually unable to run.
Alternative Four:
Connect the lower Northern line the City Circle, moving some or all of the inbound AM Bankstown line trains to the Museum. This has a conflicting move* at Macdonaldtown and thus would surely reduce reliability to pre-2005 levels so has a snowballs' chance of proceeding.
* A conflicting move is where one train needs to get in the way of a train on another track, blocking its progress. While it can be timetabled, things don't always run to timetabling. It ultimately reduces reliability.
UPDATE 22/6/2012: Or here's a better idea: Terminate the Cumberland line at Parramatta from the south. This means that Parramatta platforms 3 and 4 can become part of sector 2 and Harris Park commuters need to backtrack to Parramatta to reach the CBD. This is not really a big problem as they are likely to have a faster trip to the city by doing this in any event. This means that all tracks and platforms at Westmead and west are available to sector 3 trains without violating sectorisation and it also means Cumberland trains don't run relatively uselessly all the way to Blacktown.
Basically, to have a strict sectorisation the Cumberland line would need to either be completely removed, or pushed into what is known as sector 2, meaning lines accessing the City Circle. This means that lines through Parramatta platforms 3 and 4 need to go to sector 2, and given that it is not possible to come from the Richmond line without accessing these lines, the Richmond line needs to go along for that ride. Since trains serving Harris Park, Wentworthville, Toongabbie and Pendle Hill normally only use Parramatta platforms 3 and 4, these trains would no longer be able to reach Central. Similarly, Clyde, Auburn, Lidcombe and Burwood would no longer have a single seat service to Parramatta. Clyde stops would need to be added to selected south line trains. The most popular peak pattern - All to Redfern/Parramatta/Blacktown/Mt Druitt all to Penrith would need to be slowed down significantly with probably 6 more stops. It's not entirely clear why the lower Northern line cannot run through Town Hall with sectorisation however, even with the conflicting move* between outbound interurbans and inbound suburbans north of Strathfield. It is also unclear how Blue Mountains line trains would operate at all if this is done.
This is sectorisation becoming the enemy of Cityrail doing a good job, rather than its friend, which it usually is. I feel this is being leaked now to soften up users of Cityrail for a timetable which isn't going to be liked. It is certainly true that the Western Line needs its own path through the CBD though, which should have been built before the Epping Chatswood Rail Link was.
What alternatives are there for 2013?
Alternative One:
Increase running into Sydney Terminal for the Western Line. It is unclear why there are still 3 (both directions combined) Springwood trains per day crossing the Harbour Bridge. This was done before the ECRL freed up a few paths across the Harbour Bridge so there is precedent.
Altenative Two:
Run additional lower Northern Line trains into Sydney Terminal. This is a satisfactory option for increasing the Northern Line which is incredibly overcrowded but does nothing for the Western Line, which is nearly as bad.
Alternative Three:
Run all lower northern line trains into Sydney Terminal. The existing trains should not be damaged in this way, even if increased in frequency. Varied stopping patterns cannot reasonably apply for the Western Line between Redfern and Parramatta so all my comments above would apply in that zone and about the Blue Mountains Line trains being virtually unable to run.
Alternative Four:
Connect the lower Northern line the City Circle, moving some or all of the inbound AM Bankstown line trains to the Museum. This has a conflicting move* at Macdonaldtown and thus would surely reduce reliability to pre-2005 levels so has a snowballs' chance of proceeding.
* A conflicting move is where one train needs to get in the way of a train on another track, blocking its progress. While it can be timetabled, things don't always run to timetabling. It ultimately reduces reliability.
UPDATE 22/6/2012: Or here's a better idea: Terminate the Cumberland line at Parramatta from the south. This means that Parramatta platforms 3 and 4 can become part of sector 2 and Harris Park commuters need to backtrack to Parramatta to reach the CBD. This is not really a big problem as they are likely to have a faster trip to the city by doing this in any event. This means that all tracks and platforms at Westmead and west are available to sector 3 trains without violating sectorisation and it also means Cumberland trains don't run relatively uselessly all the way to Blacktown.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)