I said once that I didn’t get why the various incarnations of the metro are not universally compatible. Surprisingly, a merkin smarter than me agrees.
In conclusion
Sydney’s metro mania comes with a lot of hype. In reality, it is destined to be an extremely expensive and poorly thought through experiment found wanting as a cost-effective means of enhancing the metropolitan area’s public transport network. Compare it with London, Melbourne or Brisbane where new railway tunnels through the heart of each city will accommodate existing train services at improved frequencies and provide relief for all of their existing networks.
Overall, the cost of creating Sydney’s deliberately non-compatible metro rail system, let alone the cost of imposing it onto existing trackage such as the Bankstown line, substantially outweighs any imagined benefits from removing train drivers, privatising by stealth or marginally reducing tunnel bore size through the core of the CBD. Sydney will be increasingly vulnerable to service disruptions where train services can no longer be diverted onto alternative routes. Worst of all our first metro lacks the feeder routes that would provide enhanced congestion relief to the rest of the network and is limited to a ridership which is no more than half that which such a high-capacity system could readily sustain. The Parramatta to Sydney metro is poised to repeat this failure.
Taken for a ride: The real cost of Sydney's metro railways
www.sydney.edu.au
I'm all for this bloke (and his son) and you having an opinion but no, it's not that surprising that this merkin agrees. They have been anti-metro for years.
Their arguments and discussion are disingenuous at best, and full of misinformation, speculation and false facts at worst.
Honestly more of the same from these two.
Interestingly they never seem to understand the importance of frequency, reliability and speed in attracting passengers to railway travel even with the advent of WFH.
The SMH - the most anti-metro publication in this city have pedaled and re-hashed this crap. Mainly as clickbait.
February 20, 2023 -
‘Metro mania’: Former top NSW rail exec says train mega-projects lack rationale
The man who masterminded the train timetable for the Sydney Olympics warns the state is rushing to commit to mega-projects that have “little rationale”.
And this was an article from the same two clowns dated 09/01/2023
Taken for a ride: The real cost of Sydney's metro railways
www.sydney.edu.au
That's a basic copy/paste of the same article you posted this morning, dated 9th June 2024.
As I said, they provide misinformation.
Examples are as follows: I'll refer to them as he from this stage as they both have the same opinion.
- He does not state that the reason for the E/C conversion was to create a seamless link from the fast growing NW metro area to the CBD on a single line which would improve travel times.
- He does not state that to build this line as a DD Sydney trains line (as originally proposed and would have similarly been tunnelled) would not have been any cheaper.
- He does not state that the running costs of a metro line are significantly lower than that of Sydney Trains.
- He does not state that the current metro line has massive scope for increased capacity. (8 car trains instead of the current 6 - and 2-minute frequencies instead of the current 4 during peak)
- He does not state that the new CSW extension of this metro actually provides connection to the current ST's system at Martin Place, Central and Sydenham
- He does not state that the current NW Metro provides connections to the ST's system at Epping and Chatswood improving connection reliability with the current system for customers.
- He doesn't state that the reason for the Bankstown conversion was to remove the T3 line and to free up capacity through the City Circle providing more capacity for other lines through the city circle. A good thing, wouldn't you think?
- He complains about the St Mary's - WSA line being a waste of money, stating there is nothing there atm and won't be for a long time, so the line will be a white elephant, and there won't be much demand. That may well be true initially, but what is great about this line is that it is building for the future, rather than retro installing stuff when it is too late. This infrastructure being initiated first will absolutely encourage development locally, as well as employment, housing, technology, freight, education, sporting infrastructure, parks and green space. Isn't it a good thing that we have infrastructure being built before development? Bradfield would be proud.
- He keeps using the WFH excuse that we don't need these metro lines because passenger demand to the city will never be needed again during peak hour and the current system coped ok. Ahm, ok. Why are developers still building office towers in the city that the current vacancy of office space keeps consuming?
He never mentions that if there is a problem on the metro, it effects one line - the metro. If there is a problem on the ST's system, it affects multiple, if not all lines because they are all integrated. There is a reason why metro lines are segregated.
He doesn't mention that it is forecast that by 2056, WSA will have a 2nd runway and terminal and will need the infrastructure of a high capacity metro line. Isn't it better that we build it now?
C'mon mate. You are smarter than this. You've travelled to cities throughout the world that have great metro systems. Surely you can see the benefits of the Metro infrastructure finally being introduced to this city
You would normally call these two blokes "cookers", but I assume it doesn't suit your views this time to use that term but that is exactly what they are.
I don't understand why pre-building infrastructure and future proofing Sydney's transport system with metro rail infrastructure is such a bad thing.
