Western Sydney Airport (WSI) Discussion

[jpp42]

Trying to think of two nearby airports that more or less serve the same urban agglomerate that are connected by rail without changing trains,

Some misinformation above about Tokyo, it's absolutely possible to take a direct train from NRT to HND, it's jointly operated by Keisei/Keikyu and is called the ACCESS Limited Express. It takes about 90 minutes and runs every half hour - not too bad given the distances involved and the complexity of the network it travels.

Edit: Another direct train between airports is AMS to BRU, they appear to run about once an hour and take 2h10m. Whether you consider the Low Countries/Benelux the same "urban agglomerate" is up to discussion, I suppose. The entire area would be smaller than say, Seoul and its exurbs.

 

[jpp42]

Changing trains mid-journey can work OK, if done properly. But looking at the station built in St Marys, the metro station seems to be a separate one, although adjacent, to the current train station.

The way Singapore has the change organised in Tanah Merah works well because it's so simple: just walk 10 m across the platform. The next best option is an efficient and easy change of platforms within the same station complex. Hopefully they make that happen in St Marys, otherwise it'll be a lost opportunity to make the train an easy and inviting option.

The St Mary's change will require four journeys up/down: from the T1 line, up stairs/lifts to the overhead concourse, then an escalator down to street level, another one further down to the underground Metro mezzanine, and then finally the last escalator down to the platforms. There's been an attempt to make each walking segment as short as possible - for example, the escalator down from the new T1 overhead concourse will directly line up with the next segment down to the Metro mezzanine. While it's still far from a cross-platform transfer, I think it's the best we can expect. The only place we have proper cross-platform transfer between different systems in Sydney is at Chatswood (and soon at Sydenham) but that only came about because Metro took over infrastructure from Sydney Trains. The Chatswood situation was also hurt by Sydney Trains and Sydney metro refusing to cooperate on timetabling.

 

[kamchatsky]

The comment about not extending the heavy rail towards WSI was more about building a more direct line from the rest of Sydney and future proofing for growing international services. The interconnection between SYD and WSI would have been an added bonus.

Yes, the metro connection being built (as I mentioned earlier) will be good for the immediate catchment area but next to useless (or impractical) for anyone in the Northern Beaches, Inner West, CBD and East and South East.

The EL in London could have better connected to LCY (and not so much the interconnection between LHR and LCY but just because they could have/should have.

Although it has provided a one change connection between LHR and LGW.

SFO and OAK are connected by BART.

Yes, another stuff up.

The idea is to build Metro West first from Sydney CBD Hunter Street to Westmead. Then, later, if there is more funding, extend Metro West from Westmead to WSI. It is not a stuff-up as the NSW government just doesn't have that much money to build everything at once.

If you want to look at stuff up, you can look at MEL.

Even if they built a heavy rail spur line from St Marys to WSI it would have been exponentially better - the ability to run trains direct from Central to WSI, via important centres such as Paramatta & Blacktown (and hence connecting to Richmond). The ideal plan would be to run from Liverpool to St Marys via WSI which would connect it to the entire city.

As I've already said in this thread, this Australian habit of "fitted for, not with" in most cases means it never happens. The airport line in Brisbane has had a proposed station at Skygate (DFO) since its design phase and despite continued talk it still hasn't happened over 20 years later.

Nah, there is no way NSW will build heavy rail anymore. The main line is severely constrained and requires much higher operational expenditures. Metro is driverless, can run at very high capacity, and is far better suited to the future.

In fact, I would argue that more existing Sydney Trains lines will be converted to Metro in the long run to decouple the capacity constraints and lower operational expenditure. That's why they are doing the Bankstown line Metro conversion.

The actual low hanging fruit is to extend leppington into aerotropolis and WSI. This would then connect into the existing line serving also a fast way to get to SW Sydney or a quicker express into the CBD on an existing line which so happens to go via SYD as an added bonus.

From leppington station, i believe it's only about a 12-15km, 15-20 minute drive to WSI which getting an extension of the line with 2 stops should've been a no brainer.

Due to long-term operational costs, I cannot see the Leppington line getting extended to WSI. It is almost better if they extend Metro from Aerotropolis/Bradfield directly to Glenfield, convert the entire East Hills line to the Metro, and connect SYD and WSI that way.

 

[justinbrett]

Nah, there is no way NSW will build heavy rail anymore. The main line is severely constrained and requires much higher operational expenditures. Metro is driverless, can run at very high capacity, and is far better suited to the future.

Rather than debate you (considering current metro has cost far more than heavy rail per km); I'll just post this article that outlines the points better than I could.

Railroads parading as metros: the long and short of Sydney rail maze

The Berejiklian government has invested billions in metros, but big gaps between stations may defy their purpose as zippy people movers.

www.smh.com.au

Although I guess arguing about which type of rail is used at Sydney's secondary airport is probably going to annoy a lot of Victorians At least they put something in.

 

[moa999]

Changing trains mid-journey can work OK, if done properly. But looking at the station built in St Marys, the metro station seems to be a separate one, although adjacent, to the current train station.

Both Singapore branches were built at the same time.. far easier to build cross-platform connections. Also no good if coming from Tamines or Pasir Ria.
And not sure if it will still be cross -platform once the new under construction platform is complete.

St.Marys was built in 1862 and has heritage listings on much of the station.
The new Metro station will be underground in a trench next to the existing two platforms. Lifts and escalators up to a new much larger above ground concourse that will provide access to the existing platforms.

While BNE to OOL might be connected - it will be 2hrs (currently 1hr 45-50min from Airport to Varsity Lakes on the direct service)

 

[justinbrett]

While BNE to OOL might be connected - it will be 2hrs (currently 1hr 45-50min from Airport to Varsity Lakes on the direct service)

View attachment 386822

There will be some time savings with CRR.

In any case 2:00 is pretty good for a car trip that takes 1:15 with no traffic, and easily up to 2:00 with traffic. It is 108Km after all, almost double the distance between WSI & SYD.

 

[kamchatsky]

Rather than debate you (considering current metro has cost far more than heavy rail per km); I'll just post this article that outlines the points better than I could.

Railroads parading as metros: the long and short of Sydney rail maze

The Berejiklian government has invested billions in metros, but big gaps between stations may defy their purpose as zippy people movers.

www.smh.com.au

Although I guess arguing about which type of rail is used at Sydney's secondary airport is probably going to annoy a lot of Victorians At least they put something in.

Your article is Paywalled. So I cannot read it.

Also, the metro is mostly underground, and it is being built now than 100 years ago, of course cost per km is higher than heavy rail. I am very sure that if they try to build heavy rail now underground, it would cost far more than Metro.

Another thing to note that the Sydney Trains heavy rail rolling stock is much more expensive than Metro trains.

 

[SYD]

The idea is to build Metro West first from Sydney CBD Hunter Street to Westmead.

Bradfield must be turning in his grave at the prospect of a line grinding to a halt in the middle of the CBD. The reality is, no one has decided who to pork barrel first - extend it to the south east (ie La Parouse), or Bondi or God forbid, implement the original Eastern suburbs line to the airport and beyond. Not one, but two lines to/from SYD!

Then, later, if there is more funding, extend Metro West from Westmead to WSI. It is not a stuff-up as the NSW government just doesn't have that much money to build everything at once.

and apparently not even enough to complete the study on how and when to extend - that’s the stuff up I was referring to. But an “all stops” Metro from the CBD to WSI would be torture. You need an express service to do some rapid heavy lifting (the gist of the article posted by @justinbrett.

If you want to look at stuff up, you can look at MEL.

Yes, unbelievable. Yet, so many here are happy with Skybus.

Probably because the proposed rail route was all over the shop and the current bus appears to work. But just think how many buses and cars would be off the roads with a reasonably regular multi carriage train link….?

Nah, there is no way NSW will build heavy rail anymore. The main line is severely constrained and requires much higher operational expenditures. Metro is driverless, can run at very high capacity, and is far better suited to the future.

The Metro is heavy rail without unionised drivers and conductors…

In fact, I would argue that more existing Sydney Trains lines will be converted to Metro in the long run to decouple the capacity constraints and lower operational expenditure. That's why they are doing the Bankstown line Metro conversion.

Yep. Hopefully the T4 soon also but all those pesky bendy platforms (Martin Place, what were they thinking…?).

Rather than debate you (considering current metro has cost far more than heavy rail per km); I'll just post this article that outlines the points better than I could.

Railroads parading as metros: the long and short of Sydney rail maze

The Berejiklian government has invested billions in metros, but big gaps between stations may defy their purpose as zippy people movers.

www.smh.com.au

That journo was overthinking it a bit but in the context of getting to the outer fringes, it’s essential to have something that isn’t “all stations”. Anyone who‘s done the Paris RER v metro to long distances knows the differences. Putting aside how grotty the RER is - because it services those who can’t afford to live inside the Perifique.

Although I guess arguing about which type of rail is used at Sydney's secondary airport is probably going to annoy a lot of Victorians At least they put something in.

It would be more humorous if AVV gets a rail connection before MEL. It’s sooo close to existing infrastructure!

Bite the bullet and chuck an elevated train over the Tulla freeway…

 

[justinbrett]

Your article is Paywalled. So I cannot read it.

Also, the metro is mostly underground, and it is being built now than 100 years ago, of course cost per km is higher than heavy rail. I am very sure that if they try to build heavy rail now underground, it would cost far more than Metro.

Another thing to note that the Sydney Trains heavy rail rolling stock is much more expensive than Metro trains.

Metro is standard gauge with overhead wires - it's not a true metro/subway "third rail" system. Although I'm having flashbacks to our "Is Elizabeth Line a Tube Line" debate so let's not go there.

The line is mostly above ground, and a heavy rail line from Leppington would probably not go underground at all, except perhaps for the airport itself. There's really no difference in cost to the line itself (per Km) as it's essentially the same track, it's the stations where Metro has the extra costs to enable the automation. I'm also assuming Metro needs CCTV or other sensors on the entire track when above ground.

The point of the article was that choosing rolling stock for inner city lines with frequent stops should be different to suburban lines with vast distances between stations. A Metro "Metropolis" train seats 378, heavy rail Waratah seats 880. Both have significant standing room capacity on top of this, but that's not ideal for a long journey.

 

[kamchatsky]

Bradfield must be turning in his grave at the prospect of a line grinding to a halt in the middle of the CBD. The reality is, no one has decided who to pork barrel first - extend it to the south east (ie La Parouse), or Bondi or God forbid, implement the original Eastern suburbs line to the airport and beyond. Not one, but two lines to/from SYD!

and apparently not even enough to complete the study on how and when to extend - that’s the stuff up I was referring to. But an “all stops” Metro from the CBD to WSI would be torture. You need an express service to do some rapid heavy lifting (the gist of the article posted by @justinbrett.

Yes, unbelievable. Yet, so many here are happy with Skybus.

Probably because the proposed rail route was all over the shop and the current bus appears to work. But just think how many buses and cars would be off the roads with a reasonably regular multi carriage train link….?

The Metro is heavy rail without unionised drivers and conductors…

Yep. Hopefully the T4 soon also but all those pesky bendy platforms (Martin Place, what were they thinking…?).

That journo was overthinking it a bit but in the context of getting to the outer fringes, it’s essential to have something that isn’t “all stations”. Anyway who‘s done the Paris RER v metro to long distances knows the differences. Putting aside how grotty the RER is - because it services those who can’t afford to live inside the Perifique.

It would be more humorous if AVV gets a rail connection before MEL. It’s sooo close to existing infrastructure!

Bite the bullet and chuck an elevated train over the Tulla freeway…

Well that is politicians for you. Their term is four years, and not 40.

In terms of "studies" for Metro West extensions, I am happy that they focus on building the Metro West first, which is another 8-10 years to go. Any consultants can produce a "study" report and costings in a short time. They can do this 5-10 years later. No point producing "study" now as the cost would significantly increase over the years.

Is it better to have Express WSI service to key stations and the CBD? Of course! But it would simply not be economical, and the train line would cost a lot more than the airport itself. I mean if it is that cheap to build rail, you may as well start building Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane High Speed Rail Link.

That's also why they are building this spur line from St Marys. This actually allows them to start building houses along the metro lines, as well as servicing the new airport.

Metro is standard gauge with overhead wires - it's not a true metro/subway "third rail" system. Although I'm having flashbacks to our "Is Elizabeth Line a Tube Line" debate so let's not go there.

The line is mostly above ground, and a heavy rail line from Leppington would probably not go underground at all, except perhaps for the airport itself. There's really no difference in cost to the line itself (per Km) as it's essentially the same track, it's the stations where Metro has the extra costs to enable the automation. I'm also assuming Metro needs CCTV or other sensors on the entire track when above ground.

The point of the article was that choosing rolling stock for inner city lines with frequent stops should be different to suburban lines with vast distances between stations. A Metro "Metropolis" train seats 378, heavy rail Waratah seats 880. Both have significant standing room capacity on top of this, but that's not ideal for a long journey.

Unfortunately, the journalist's piece is too simplistic and does not take into account the financials and constraints of existing infrastructures, as well as that tax payers are paying for all these works.

For CCTV and Sensors, heavy rails still have them, but just different types. In fact, Sydney Trains' Digital Systems Program is a huge program to upgrade all the existing Sydney Trains' signalling systems over many years:

Digital Systems Program | Transport for NSW

The Digital Systems Program will replace signalling and train control technology with modern, internationally proven, intelligent systems.

www.transport.nsw.gov.au

What will most likely happen is that WSI Metro will extend to Leppington and then run parallel with existing Sydney Trains tracks and terminate at Glenfield. This allows WSI passengers to transfer at Glenfield to SYD Airport/East Hills Line to SYD and vice versa. Existing Leppington to Glenfield tracks cannot be converted as Leppington has a huge stabling facility for heavy rail rolling stock and those heavy rail rolling stocks have to go somewhere.

 

[justinbrett]

Unfortunately, the journalist's piece is too simplistic and does not take into account the financials and constraints of existing infrastructures, as well as that tax payers are paying for all these works.

For CCTV and Sensors, heavy rails still have them, but just different types. In fact, Sydney Trains' Digital Systems Program is a huge program to upgrade all the existing Sydney Trains' signalling systems over many years:

I think you're glossing over the fact that both modes are heavy rail, just that one is automated and the other is not. You see plenty of trains in Tokyo that are not automated but have the same kind of infrastructure (eg platform doors)

I don't buy your arguments that "classic" heavy rail costs are significantly more especially when you can guarantee there'll be a hefty station access fee at WSI to fund it all. Sure build it to the new standards but don't let that come at the cost of integration.

 

[kamchatsky]

I think you're glossing over the fact that both modes are heavy rail, just that one is automated and the other is not. You see plenty of trains in Tokyo that are not automated but have the same kind of infrastructure (eg platform doors)

I don't buy your arguments that "classic" heavy rail costs are significantly more especially when you can guarantee there'll be a hefty station access fee at WSI to fund it all. Sure build it to the new standards but don't let that come at the cost of integration.

But integration is the absolute last thing Sydney Trains needs. The current Sydney Trains network is already at capacity. That's why they are building Metro West in parallel to the existing Western line. That's also why they are converting the Bankstown line to the Metro later this year, which will free up capacity on City Circle to handle more trains in the remaining Sydney Trains network. Throwing more trains to existing Sydney Trains network is not the answer. Yes, it may be convenient for tourists, but at the expense of ordinary Sydneysiders who regularly catch the trains.

It is a fact that the current Sydney Trains network is so integrated, that one small issue means a massive impact on the overall ST network:

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/single-sick-staff-member-sends-sydney-trains-network-into-chaos/news-story/0c28a932125aa79e2795f028155d5e7a

That's why building separate <metros/heavy rail/whatever you call it> is far better so that overall disruption is minimal if something goes wrong. That's also why new infrastructures should be as automated as possible.

 

[SYD]

Looks like PER is feeling the heat with WSI coming on line soon!

 

[Lynda2475]

WSI was supposed to be curfew free however protests from nearby residents already well under way calling for this to change. Would not surprise me in the least if there is a backfflip.

 

[SCM]

WSI was supposed to be curfew free however protests from nearby residents already well under way calling for this to change. Would not surprise me in the least if there is a backfflip.

Pointless to have built that airport there then - that would be a truly disastrous outcome.

 

[RooFlyer]

WSI was supposed to be curfew free however protests from nearby residents already well under way calling for this to change. Would not surprise me in the least if there is a backfflip.

Just like those under SYD flight paths - everyone there now knew there would be noise one way or another. I can't see calls for SYD to drop the curfew will be successful either.

 

[justinbrett]

WSI was supposed to be curfew free however protests from nearby residents already well under way calling for this to change. Would not surprise me in the least if there is a backfflip.

And BNE building a parallel runway to allow opposite direction over the bay, therefore reducing noise over night, but now with all the extra traffic (with a massive increase in population during that time) the locals want a curfew.

The WSI noise problems are going to be epic, mark my words. These are people not used to living near an international airport, and probably a majority bought before it was approved. SYD has been there since 1911, with the current runways (excluding the parallel) built in the 50s.

 

[elanshin]

WSI was supposed to be curfew free however protests from nearby residents already well under way calling for this to change. Would not surprise me in the least if there is a backfflip.

Not going to happen. 24h operations is one of the key points for justification of WSI in the first place.

 

[justinbrett]

Not going to happen. 24h operations is one of the key points for justification of WSI in the first place.

Don't be so sure. The movement has already started, and election season is approaching.

‘Our village is dissolving’: Fury over aircraft noise from Sydney’s new airport

A loophole has left people living about a kilometre from the new curfew-free airport’s runway ineligible for noise insulation for their homes.

www.smh.com.au

 

[elanshin]

Don't be so sure. The movement has already started, and election season is approaching.

‘Our village is dissolving’: Fury over aircraft noise from Sydney’s new airport

A loophole has left people living about a kilometre from the new curfew-free airport’s runway ineligible for noise insulation for their homes.

www.smh.com.au

I'd imagine they'd rather do noise insulation for people than potentially risk it turning into avalon 2.0.