The cost of converting the Bankstown line is a minor part of the $17b price tag. The bulk of this cost is the tunnel under the harbour & CBD from Chatswood to Sydenham, The cost of converting the Bankstown line to metro is minor compared to building a whole new Metro line. As the video says there are many benefits to the overall rail network from converting the Bankstown line to Metro. The other conversion options such as to Hurstville weren’t feasible because this line is shared with Cronulla & Illawarra trains. Airport line would be better option but this would have added congestion on Sydenham to Central section of network as T8 trains would have to go via Sydenham.
Adding a point against upgrading the airport line. The airport is moving away to west Sydney (hopefully). Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport will become what is left of Hong Kong's Kai Tak Airport (the old HK airport). The new metro line wouldn't run for many years before the airport itself is gone.
@@garrywallace1007 That's interesting. I didn't know about that. Is Sydney going to have 2 major airports when it has 70% the population and far less transferring visitors than HK?
@@serena-yu yes. Kingsford Smith will still be the primary airport and WSA will likely take the extra traffic or the traffic that wants to land after hours.
The benefits of taking the Bankstown line off the city circle are enormous. As flawed as this project is, that single goal alone is worth finishing it. That said, I’ve never understood why it terminates at Bankstown. They could have fixed most of the problems by building a few extra stations towards Birrong or Regents Park, then there’s be no need for a stupid shuttle.
One reason it terminates at Bankstown is because they want to eventually extend it directly to Liverpool and then to Badgery's Creek Airport via the Marion Street corridor. The train stations between Bankstown and the Western line and Liverpool are not economical stations, and they create congestion for the Western line... or something like that. But I personally hope the project is canned in favour of Metro lines elsewhere (like North Sydney to Mosman and Edgecliff to Vaucluse... those areas need tonnes of super high rise public housing apartment towers.... we can move the population of Alice Springs to Vaucluse and Mosman... that'll solve their problems).
@@ytlurker220 yea but I think the point is you could still have built it to Liverpool eventually as a split line at bankstown where the 2 lines would merge.
@@Banana_Split_Cream_Buns most people i've seen are advocating for the metro to stop 3 stations later at regents park it may not be economical, but it allows a seemless transition. I'm just hoping that the governement creates a north-south connection based on the shuttle route, such as a hurstville to rhodes via bankstown line or something. basically, a giant u-turn line.
I use the T3 Bankstown line nearly daily, and seeing the progress that has been made I find it hard to believe that the project will be cancelled. It is way too far into development to be stopped
Exactly, it's nearly completed, the " insider's source " might be true 2-3 years ago. All the station upgrades plus track works along the way from Sydenham-Bankstown are virtually at the last finishing touch stage.
Exactly. It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
I can tell you all the station upgrades are Window dressing. They were always happening anyways because of the Transport Access projects happening across the network. Putting in lifts and the like. The heavy lifting of the project would have been in the 8 months the line was said to shut for to convert it. It's unlikely but the possibility is still there
@@leescharich6876 The transition and upgrade is not finished until it _is_ finished. The engineers need to take full possession of the entire rail corridor to effect the full conversion. This is not a quick and easy process, as this task is always slower compared to building a brand new line. The estimate of 15 months is perhaps rather conservative, in order to manage the expectations of the general public. The works may only take 12 months. It is like totally renovating and remodelling a house. It is just quicker to level the existing home, then start from scratch. But, this is just not possible with the existing Bankstown Line.
Just a bit of trivia. The Bankstown Line was originally meant to turn south just past Bankstown and head for Liverpool. It would have passed near the (now puzzlingly named) Railway Parade in Connell Park and through where Bankstown airport was subsequently developed (first flattened out as an area as a job creation scheme in the depression years, then developed during WW2.) Instead we got the cheaper via Regents Park option and Bankstown services running around a full circle both ways to the City until the Lidcombe turnback was constructed. Running the Metro a bit further to Regents Park or Sefton sounds attractive, but is a difficult (if not practically, then politically impossible) piece of engineering; what with not only the suburban tracks but the diving South Sydney Freight Line to contend with. The good news not mentioned is that Liverpool would be a winner out of the Metro arrangements, fostering reintroduction of the fast City via Regent's Park services that used to exist way back - a good 10 to 15 minutes faster than via Granville.
Cost wasn't the reason the train went north. Geography was and still probably is in 2023. The basin below the georges is not particularly good for a tunnel and then flooding also plays an issue the current line doesn't have to deal with. I agree with Harry Goldun that running single decks beyond Bankstown to Lidcombe and Liverpool should be an option with the driverless trains terminating at Banktown and new 8 car single deck trains which could run on the existing line and maybe some new line expansion north of epping to allow metro to run to hornsby on new lines over or underneath the existing main north.
This project would likely have had a lot less pushback from the local community if it extended pass Bankstown to at least Regents Park to begin with. So the T3 line would become a straight run between Liverpool and Lidcombe with an easy connection to the metro at Regents Park, getting rid of the need for an awkward shuttle service. They could then also give the new T3 a direct line into the city by reinstating the old Liverpool to City Circle via Regents Park route that a lot of the local community want.
even merging the T7 shuttle with this upcoming awkward shuttle to become a rail route between Bankstown to Olympic Park is bit better, atleast at Olympic Park residents in Birrong and Yagoona can use Metro West there
It's been done that way for a future extension straight to Liverpool (without dealing with the triangle).. I still retain hope that the Bankstown to Lidcombe section of track might be reused as part of a North-South line including a new underground platform at Lidcombe going to the existing Olympic Park station
Might have a slight problem extending the metro to Lidcombe via Regents Park, as that section with Regents Park and Berala is technically classed as part of the Main South Line, even though in theory, that plan would be good, but terrible at the same time as all freight trains would have to go back via Granville (which some do due to the sidings in Yennora for Qube Logistics).
@@JaseyRae there is adequete room to add another platform at regents park, though it could be hard on second thought, uhhh it'll look actually awful to add
If one of the goals of South West Metro is to increase development and density, I would see this more as a long term city building project - especially considering the government has massively increased immigration. The higher density, and apartment style developments around the stations would facilitate the need for more capacity and frequency. I think it would be short sighted to cancel it - In my opinion.
It should not be forgotten that the Sydney metro are 6-car trains, which limits the capacity compared to trains in multiple units of 8 cars (the double decker does not significantly increase the capacity, because too many seats and stairs waste space). I'm from Paris, so I don't know the line traffic, but the choice of an intermediate line is prudent, but not necessarily bad. Can the metro be extended to 8 cars (platforms planned for ???) As for the cost of the project (14 billion), it seems high, but there is the whole tunnel section under the CBD, plus the remodeling of the stations and the automation. For the rest, the Sydney metro seems to follow the example of our RER, which uses suburban lines, with a tunnel under the centre. The only difference for us, is the non-automation, and the fact that 223/245 m trains run there, because we took the length of the suburban quays as a reference at the time.
@Peter Cowan In terms of seat yes, in terms of space (standing or seated) no. The longitudinal Asian configurations allow enormous capacities, superior to the double decker.
@Peter Cowan I agree that you lose comfort (though personally I find crush capacity on Sydney trains more unpleasant than on Sydney Metro), but I disagree that you lose capacity. RM Transit has a great video explainer about this: by having single deck trains with slightly less capacity but far more doors, you can vastly decrease the amount of stopping time at each station, and therefore run more trains. It seems counter-intuitive that a smaller train would lead to an overall capacity increase, but it does stack up. This assumes they do the right thing and run a train every 90-120 seconds as seen in London. If they run them at the same frequency as Sydney trains, then your point stands.
Your insider seems to have an agenda and has resulted in a very one-sided video. I'd suggest looking at the STAR project, particularly the Erskineville crossover and how that is planned to alter the service pattern on those lines (illawarra, south coast, east hills, and southern highlands lines), as well as the promised additional services on the illawarra and south coast lines as evidence that the removal of the Bankstown trains will open up space for additional services to ease the congestion on those other lines you mention as being congested. It is also following the overall transport plan and even in line with the old clearways projects (it gives the benefits of the previously proposed clearways sextuplification, but with a new corridor and stations from Sydenham to Central). Does it really matter whether Bankstown or Hurstville ends up being metro, as long as the two lines are given separate paths into Central so as to allow more services? As far as the old infrastructure, you've shown some of the work that they're doing, why is this a problem for the project, they seem to have reasonable solutions already in progress (and platform screen doors are a great safety idea, metro or otherwise). You should consider the figures they gave you for the cost of converting the Bankstown line, they seem to be almost the entire cost of the project, surely that's not correct! The union issue is a pain and is causing issues, but is that really related to the decision to convert the Bankstown line? And the multi billion dollar project with the issue that it needs to build secure climb-resistant fences! Is that really something that needs much thought put into how it will be solved, maybe you should contact Sydney Metro and ask them, or even look at what they are already doing to solve that exact problem between Chatswood and the Atarmon dive, rather than put it out there as a critical issue for the project. I understand the issues with the almost orphaned stations and think that needs discussion, but would benefit from a less one-sided argument (what are the patronage figures here?). And as for cancelling it, what are the political views expressed by Labor? It's a high profile expensive project, are they making noise about cancelling it? I know from your other videos that you have the capability to research and critically analyse things and really hope that you revisit this subject soon with some more information from your own research and analysis rather than parroting some secret "insider's" views without challenging them.
I wonder if the current Government knows it is best to cancel this project but is leaving it as a poisoned chalice to a (likely) upcoming Labor government.
The current government will, based on all polls, get booted in March. It is easier for the new government to cancel it and blame the last guy but they also run the risk of reminding people of their less than stellar record on starting and then canceling projects such as their infamous inner city metro
Nonsense. It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
Thanks for this intresting presentation. Having lived in this country for nearly 70 years I have seen some mind boggling disasters brought about by our bureaucrats, but I really can't believe that they would cancel this project.
@@TopHat841 Exactly, the " insider's source " may be true 2-3 years ago. All the stations upgrade + trackwork along the way from Sydenham-Bankstown are virtually at the last finishing touch stage. Yep, both parties want it, zero chance it will be cancelled, the bombshell from his " insider " is a dud.
i agree, i used to live on the bankstown line when the heavy rail was used, and it took 45 mins to get to strathfield, for an inter-connecting train to hornsby....so with the upgrade to the bankstown line to metro, would be significantly greater for the people who live on the line, to get to work in the city, with far more frequent trains (metro) than the standard timetable of the heavy rail trains before the upgrade commenced.
Absolutely ridiculous how successive government destroyed a properly good train line. I can guarantee those clowns who designed the timetable and schedule the trains live NOWHERE NEAR any of the train stations sWest of Bankstown. Those clowns couldn't care less about people who need to use the train stations from Cabramatta to Lidcombe/Bankstown, tbh. To me, it's blatant discrimination against people who live in the suburbs near these train stations, as if they are unimportant and second class citizens (compared to rest of Sydney, I mean even Penrith LOL)
@@listohan what kind of non-sense - there are no random commuters on that train line? T3 users are really that special? LMAO. The blatant lies and propaganda narratives spewed out by bureaucrats. You really think everyone are low IQ and stupid?
I think what might save the project is by extending the soon to be Light Rail stage 2, that stops at Carter St to streets that connect Lidcombe-Regent stations leading to Auburn Rd and then connect the Light Rail line to the Birrong-Bankstown stations, by doing this you'll encourage new development around the areas.
Congratulations on another great insightful video. The extension of the metro to Bankstown was never a perfect solution to anything but was seen as the best answer to multiple problems with Sydney Trains and the congestion around the City Circle. I now live in Melbourne and the State government is spending $12.5 billion dollars to create more space around the city loop by adding a new line through the CBD. This means that more trains can be run on the existing suburban lines increasing overall capacity. Converting the T3 Bankstown line to metro will solve the City Circle problem at a fraction of the cost that Melbourne is facing. I have spent 11 years of my life living overseas on and off and I have previously cringed with embarrassment when I return to Sydney and experience our transportation infrastructure. So much of Sydney trains operation is 19th century with platform staff with a white and red flag and a guard at the back of the train sticking his head out the door as a train approaches a curved platform. What can he see? It is absurd. The NIF trains have been declared to be safe by independent international experts, but the Unions won’t have it. Melbourne has DOO trains. If the ALP is elected, I am sure they will cancel the T3 conversion. They are controlled by the Unions and they don’t want to bring us into the 21st century. The Sydney Metro project is truly world-class and I am always amazed that an Australian government had the vision and the courage to proceed with it rather than being limited by the Sydney Trains hierarchy who still seem to be back in the 20th century. I don’t have much hope for future Metro expansion if the ALP are in power. I am simply glad that we had a period of great vision when the Metro was introduced.
Nice video. I have worked for 5 years on the Metro and have worked on the Sydenham to Bankstown section up until mid last year. Some facts about upgrading to Metro. 1. The overhead voltage is the same. The track is the same. The signaling is twice as close and modernised, the points removed and track renewed, and this is what allows the increase of trains on the network. These benefits will flow onto the existing rolling stock if the Metro in this section is canned 2. The corridor width is not changing and is only able to support 4 lines. To install the Metro it means it has to use two of the existing lines. If you observe these train lines you will notice diesel locomotives pulling rolling stock and containers in and out of Port Botany onto these lines and it is very busy. So 4 lines for Freight / Passenger will turn into 2 lines for Freight and 2 lines for Metro. There is no redundancy this way 3. Metro is old technology and the trains are limited to 100kph. This is no better than the current trains whose speed is limited to the conditions of the track. We have ruined the opportunity to use our brains and install high speed rail and true high speed trains as in the European countries. In fact our trains today go slower than the red rattlers of the war time era. 4. In my opinion the true benefits of the project are the purses of John Holland and Lang O Rourke who are the main contractors working on building the Metro. It is very sad like you mention that all this money is not being well spent when there are so many other rail projects that could provide so much more tangible benefits. Good video and thanks for making it
I've worked on the Sydenham to Bankstown project for 4 years. While I am bound by confidentiality and cannot explain my reasons, I do not agree with the speculation from the 'insider'. It would be catastrophic for all involved if we were to believe that speculation.
@Peter Cowan well, the nsw government says that it doesn't want to upgrade sydney trains anymore (i think I heard it from some building beautifully video, can't remember) but r u kidding me?! Sydney trains awesomeness is flexibility, just look at the flying junctions. it would've been cheaper to just have metro be potentially cross compatible with trains. liberals, not allowing trains to liberally convert to metro. :facepalm:
@Peter Cowan I don't work there anymore. At a guess I would say you are correct. There would be changes to be made to convert it back to normal rail but the 'improvements' could be rolled on
The reason the Bankstown line was chosen is that property developers control the NSW government. Any other logistical justification is window dressing around the insatiable desire of property developers for real estate.
@@AlphaGeekgirlyou would like me to provide a citation in support of my contention that the NSW government is controlled by property developers? Sure! Let's start here: https: // en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rum_Rebellion
@@ColinMcCormack Maybe something a bit more up to date. Most if not all cities around the world are building high rise for very sound urban planning reasons. Why would Sydney be any different? I would be more annoyed if they were encouraging unsustainable urban sprawl.
I don’t think cancelling will save much money because the contracts are already signed. I agree that the Bankstown line was not the best line to convert as it’s not the busiest line. But removing it from the city circle still frees up capacity for extra services for T8 and T2, so they should just see it through.
@@gregessex1851 Won't save a damn thing. The original cost of the conversion was 1-1.5b, estimates that it's ballooned to roughly $2b. Contracts are already signed and this is just the first stage of an extended line to Liverpool (not to mention freeing up space in the City Circle). Neither side of politics in NSW is going to cancel this. I have no idea where he gets the $17b figure (it's $18.5b for the entire Chatswood-Bankstown line, does he really think the tunnel's only cost a billion?) and someone having "a feeling" is not credible reporting.
@@BlackGateofMordor It will save money if there are works that are not carried out. Awarding a contract doesn’t mean you having to pay out the total value of the contract if it is not completed
Being less busy made it ideal for conversion, less people to disrupt and it also means it’s an under-utilised corridor. Some stations only get 4tph in the peak and they will get 15tph when metro opens. That will make the corridor much better utilised.
If the Sydney metro is terminating at Sydenham, it means another train line at Sydenham. This may improves the access from Sydenham to North Sydney while not creating inconvenience to the existing bankstown line corridor.
I think they should make extend sydney metro west to the northern beaches via another rail tunnel under the sydney harbour to Manly, then elevated through the northern beaches. Much better than the road tunnel option
*more inconvenience. Terminating at Lidcombe was a huge inconvenience already, on top of that, they used to run Inner West trains only as far as Homebush. A mate who lived in Berala but worked in Newtown had to get three trains to work instead of the one... (It's two now, but still)
Seriously, is everyone too young to remember the Bankstown Line before 2013??? The Bankstown Line was NEVER the original cause of the congestion in the city; the govt made it that way themselves by snapping up the Bankstown loop in 2013 so that Banko trains terminate at Lidcombe and they use the flyover to loop and return to Bankstown from the city causing the congestion. Meanwhile BEFORE 2013, the Inner West line was a thing: City to Livo via Regents Park. And these two lines would trade with each other on the city circle without blocking any other trains: ex-Inner West and ex-Fairfield trains run clockwise in the city then run to either Bankstown or East Hills via the airport, while ex-Bankstown and ex-East Hills trains run anticlockwise and depart off to the Inner West or to Fairfield. They should’ve brought THAT old plan back and the congestion would be over. Problem solved. Meanwhile the ‘Metro’ should’ve gone to Hurstville. Especially with how some massive crowds of people heading into the Sutherland Shire sometimes struggle to get onto completely packed trains where about 85% of passengers already onboard would be getting off at stations between Arncliffe and Hurstville. (By the way, no. I am not connected in any way with those ridiculously extremist and irrational ‘Restore Inner West Line’ and anti-Metro groups. This is my own view as someone who commutes between Fairfield and Cronulla, and also was living in Bankstown before.) By the way, buses are still an important mode. For Punchy to Livo noted at 14:22, the longer, but less hassle way is to get the train one stop to Bankstown, and then M90 bus all the way straight to Liverpool.
Excellent video. One of the aims of converting the Bankstown line to Metro was to reduce conjestion on the city circle. Bradfield, way back in the 1920s, anticipated the need, with trains from Wynyard, crossing the Harbour bridge on the eastern side, going through tunnels at North Sydney, and continuing to serve the Northern Beach suburbs. The tunnels were started at North Sydney. Conversion of this corridor to the Cahill Expressway in about 1960, adding the ugly viaduct across Circular Quay could have been addressed with a road tunnel as part of a metro link into the city from Chatswood - the transport corridor still exists for extra raillines. This is a missed opportunity to also improve the Circular Quay area.
John Bradfield also specified four tracks on the north shore line. He also stated that the north shore line needed a connection to Epping to allow the network to function if a disruption occurred.
@@ForTheBirbs That's why Epping Road is as wide as it is now (apart from the sections deliberately narrowed to encourage use of the Lane Cove Toll Tunnel). The rail connection would have paralleled Epping Road.
Excellent point but what is bellow the Cahill Expressway is the City Circle line at Circular Quay therefore you need to modify both Railway line and the Expressway itself if allowed to do so
Sydneysider here, born and breed within Western Sydney. This video was well organised, informative, thought out and thorough. Well done! Great work! Keep it up! Subscribed!
Hi Sharath, thanks for including this video. As I previously lived at Marrickville on the Bankstown line, this area is of special interest to me. It is quite amazing all the changes that have occurred up there and it will be interesting to see how Sydney Metro progresses, especially in this area. Anyway, take care. Rob in Melbourne Australia.
The Sydenham to Bankstown section could be cancelled? Awesome! The whole line from Sydenham to Bankstown should just have their stations upgraded to modern standards with DDA compliance and modernised signs. It's been riddled with corruption from the beginning and was one of the stupidest projects to ever be invisaged. End the metro at Sydenham and turn off the blowtorch searing through the state government's wallet.
Thanks very much for an interesting video. Glad Paul is supporting you as well with his research. I have to agree about all these projects that don't link up and are dead end or creating more changes from Metro to Heavy etc. Same thing with why they dug up the Carlingford line to convert to Light Rail and didn't continue it to link up with the other 2 modes at Epping. I have a photo from the old Carlingford station of a map of the area that even shows a possible ancient plan to continue the Carlingford or whatever line to Epping. wee are subscribed.
There was a plan (PECRL) to extend the Carlingford as part of a planned heavy rail line from Chatswood - Epping - Parramatta (maybe branching off from the also-planned NW heavy rail west of Epping, which would have been great) but it was abandoned in the repeated starts, stops and changes to transport projects (dating from the 1930s !). The remnant was the useful Chatswood - Epping link, and the NW Metro uses that and then follows more or less the path of the old NW heavy rail plan. As the Carlingford line terminates in a valley it would seem possible to tunnel to Epping from there if it was still heavy rail, as a surface HR line would never get approved in that area. But a LR would probably want to be on the surface. When was the plan you photographed from?
I've been using the T3 from Belmore for over 20 years. The simple solution to preventing T3 congesting the city circle was to terminate T3 at Sydenham and have us change trains there. The $2 billion spent on T3 could have been spent taking Metro somewhere from Sydenham that doesn't already have a rail line or building up up the northern beaches where there is plenty of congestion. Changing trains at Sydenham is no big deal. We've already been doing it for years as they build metro and before that when track work regularly closed T3 all the way to the city. But the metro wasteful rebuild of T3 is all about de-unionising rail travel and building 8-12 story apartments without public amenities and infrastructure the length of both sides of the T3 line. And when its privatised, I expect on what we've seen with privatisation so far that those alleged 4 minute intervals between trains will blow out and prices will rise each year by 4% or inflation, whichever is higher. I'd be surprised if its cancelled. Its too far advanced, even with all the problems. The cost will instead blow out further.
@@fanmael1 if you live on the T3, then you've changed trains at Sydenham many times over the past years and its no big deal. If you want to go to Bondi or Cronulla or Ashfield, or Olympic park, you have to change trains and its no big deal. If you have used a metro overseas, changing trains is normal and no big deal.
Now the state government is giving very little building uplift to Hurlstone Park, but is to every other station on the Syd to Bankstown line. It begs the question, why?
It's undoubtedly the case that pushing high rise development was a main driver for the metro conversion, over and above any other benefits it may have had. I think the state government saw how the Epping link turned out (eg all the development at the North Ryde station) and said "let's do more of that". Particularly the big juicy slab of land between Canterbury west of Cook's River and Bankstown. Unfortunately, having driven through Bankstown recently, I'm not convinced that the quality of development is very high. The blocks are either too tall or too close together. They're not spaced to let light through so there mist be some real sunless caverns in there.In the best Sydney tradition, I suspect all the new builds will be mediocre and horribly overpriced (both for renters and owner-occupiers). Still at least there's some chance the whole thing might get finished eventually. Look at the whole Top Ryde and Melrose Park developments, based on light rail lines that got cancelled. But hey they made the road wider. I can understand your enthusiasm for high density- me not so much but agree to differ etc- but I think in NSW we haven't got a clue how to do it well. I can think of an occasional well done locations- the new stuff on Broadway opposite UTS at Central for example- but a lot of it is badly designed and is aimed at maximising developer profit rather than aesthetics or amenity.
Almost impossible to cancel the metro at this late stage. Apart from the break costs (payout) it amounts to defaulting on a contract - governments almost never do this as it will affect the state's credit rating, meaning downgraded AAA to AA or B and paying higher interest and less willingness by private sector investment. Look what happened to Eastlink in Melbourne. What they *could* do is "stage" the project, ie, finish up to Sydenham only, provided the contract allows this.
During the early 1970’s I regularly travelled from Ermington to Sydney CBD to work. This took me 1hr 20mins. Today, in 2023, I’m retired and living in Maitland. It now takes the same time (1hr 20mins) to travel across Maitland by bus, a 15 min journey by car.
Yes, the car will still be king of transport for at least the next 50-100 years, I see NO other ways of even lessen the importance of this private mode of transport.
The MAIN REASON that the Bankstown conversion to Metro going ahead is the simple fact that running a shorter Metro service to Sydenham is not financially viable enough for them. They need the track to be over 65km long and extending it to Bankstown makes the Metro line 66km in length.
Love your content mate! While very informative, I could not agree with your insider with his "gut feeling" of project being cancelled. And with Labor now committing to complete the Sydenham to Bankstown conversion to metro, I hope this topic can be put to rest. It was obvious that cancelling the project would've costed much more to the taxpayer than simply finishing it. I say this because by the time of the state election, so much work has been done to the point that it would've been irreversible. Because it wasn't just upgrading the stations to be more accessible like your insider stated, there were SEVERAL major construction points added to the project since it started: All the metro power and substations (since the metro needs its own power source outside of the heavy rail one), all the metro cabling and conduits installed and connected to each station (from Sydenham to Bankstown), raising the platforms and adding the mechanical gap filler equipment, the new infrastructure built at Bankstown (new metro platforms opposite the existing island platform), the removal of the Bankstown and Campsie rail alignment (which would allow trains to terminate at Bankstown and Campsie respectively) AND, the plan to increase rail capacity on the Illawarra line, taking up platforms 3 to 6 at Sydenham station. Couple this with the existing platforms 1 and 2 (where trains to and from the Bankstown line used to stop) now fully converted to metro, and this would've made it near IMPOSSIBLE to keep the Bankstown line on heavy rail. All of this was well past planning and in its construction phase, some of which were at near completion by the time Labor came into government. It would've been highly irresponsible of EITHER political party to cancel a project so deep in its development, where many billions were spent and several infrastructure points at near competition. IMO Labor are simply playing politics with the metro projects, saying they are "saving" the metro south west and metro west. More like trying to claim the projects as their own and throwing away any correlation they had to the Liberal party. But that's just my take on the whole situation. In any case, lets see the metro south west project to its end and hope it improves all those who live along the corridor. Cheers :)
I lived at Yagoona years ago and used to catch an express train to the city. When Gladys came along as Transport Minister, she changed that so the express trains started at Bankstown. It basically meant that everyone travelling to the city from Yagoona (and I assume also Birong) had to change at Bankstown anyway...
I had a lot to do with the metro line from Chatswood to Sydenham with Rockwell Automation. We manufacturered 172 control panels, each of them up to 2300mm tall and up to 1800mm long for the TCC panels. We made emergency evacuation panels (EVP), one for each station (its 9, right?), a server panel and other controllers & PLCs for the tunnnel ventilation. That doesn't include the drives (VSDs), i don't know how many there were as i wasn't controlling that undertaking. The point i want to make is about the challenges of COVID and the great chip shortage, which has slowed down a lot of industries. Rockwell came up with a course of action to get through the production backlog and foresees a return to normal by March 2024. Any project that requires industrial computing & logic processing will be delayed. In saying that, yes there have been other factors, but the scene was already set.
I have experienced the Seoul Metro system. I first came across it in 1993 when roads in that city were not closed off but rather bottle-necked to allow for underground tunnel and related construction works. I have revisited Seoul on a number of occasions since and am impressed how the Korean Metro systems work. Each line is independent of each of the other lines and there are numerous lines. Each line crosses each of the other lines of the system at least once. Each line carries its own individual line number code and its own individual colour code. Each station has its own line-station number together with a station name. Seoul Forest station, as an example, has a station number indicating its line number followed by its position number on the line ( e.g. Station 123 is that station between stations 22 and 24 on line 1 with line 1 having its own colour code). When I first confronted the Seoul Metro system map I was shelled shocked because there is so much to take in but once I worked it out I could, as one not able to read and speak Korean, get around. I will state that Metro systems tend to be underground and above ground and not on ground.
That's why I hate the light rail or tram, running on the ground with shared traffic is so ancient and dangerous. Imagine Sydney dug up its 19th Century tram network nearly 60 years ago only to revert back to that crap. On the other hand, if the metro and tram have their own separate right of way as underground tunnel or elevated track, then I am all for it.
When I first saw the plans for the southwest metr I, for some reason, assumed they'd build the metro underground under the existing stations and repurposed the land above for more development. Probably not possible or too slow to build or whatever. Would be a real shame if the metro they build suffers from many of the old lines problems.
There wouldn’t be much point putting it underground as a lot of the length also has freight lines next to it so you wouldn’t really be freeing up the corridor.
Thanks for a really interesting video that covered many issues! Transport-oriented development doesn't require the Bankstown line to be a Metro, as far as I can see, so it can still happen. A transit system that requires 2 or 3 changes just to get from outlying areas to the city (or even nearby areas) is effectively NOT that rapid. Changing trains takes time and is a PITA for commuters who already have a long distance to travel. This may actually *discourage* use of the system. The report you mention rightly points out that converting the Sydenham - Bankstown line eliminates flexibility. For instance, it's possible to run western line trains via Sydenham and Auburn with the current system. I have travelled on Blue Mountains services using this diversion several times. It is useful in cases of trackwork or other disruptions. It also precludes any service (say) between Western Sydney and the South East (there actually used to be a Penrith - Bankstown - Cronulla service). The money spent to upgrade stations on the Bankstown line would not all be wasted if the Metro extension is cancelled. And if it's going to cost further billions it might be a case of cutting losses. Surely refurbishment, improved access, and safety is useful whether it's Metro OR Heavy Rail. Maybe even some of the improved signalling would be useful. Hopefully not too much money has been spent on platform screen doors etc.. The industrial dispute over the NIF were justified IMO. The then government's anti-union stance led to them trying to eliminate guards, which with the reduced passenger care and poor visibility (via CCTV to the driver), due to curved platforms and heavy weather being a real issue in the Blue Mountains, for instance. Extending the Metro to Sydenham (and also to Schofields) would still help ease stress on the system and makes sense.
So many of these problems could have been fixed if the North West Rail Link was never decided to be a standalone line using automated trains. If it had used the same rolling stock and signalling as the rest of the Sydney railway network, then it could have had trains to the city from the beginning, and future projects now under the Metro brand would have been simpler too. The Chatswood-Sydenham link could still have been built (it's been planned for a long time), and even if Bankstown Line services had been redirected to use the new tunnel instead of going to the City Circle, the line would still have been compatible with other trains, and it would have been possible to have other service patterns on it in case of disruption or trackwork elsewhere (like the way Western Line trains are rarely diverted via Bankstown when the Inner West line is closed). It would have also required much less extensive upgrades at Bankstown Line stations. Sure, Metro-type trains are better in most ways than classic double-decker trains, but do their advantages outweigh all this?
The answer is obvious. No drivers. After the nightmares of negotiating over the NIF, why ever build a passenger heavy rail track for a non-Metro line ever again.
they also screwed up with the metro between parramatta and sydney cbd. they said it would remove trains from the congested mainline, when actually, it just adds another line taking a new route. the other lines will still have to go via the mainline and it will still be congested
The worst PR fail is they never explained to the public, it will take the Bankstown line off the city circle. Commuters are frustrated at network delays, full trains and they want the government to fix it and not build a pointless metro. Ask any commuters, they won't know the metro does exactly this, frees up the city circle to add more trains across the network, reduces line interdependency and prevents the whole network grinding to a halt. Government PR keeps focusing on aesthetics of the metro trains and stations, very out of touch with the people.
One of the important reasons for converting the Bankstown Line to Metro was to reduce passenger numbers at Town Hall and Wynard stations. Cancelling the Metro to Bankstown would only add more pressure to these already overcrowded stations. The reason the Metro didn't go to Hurstville is simple. The T4 line is shared between Sydney & NSW trains and is also a major heavy freight route. The existing rail corridor simply could not handle the extra rail traffic.
As history shows, the worse thing an incoming government can do is cancel a current infrastructure project. As stated, canceling this project would put in doubt the Metro project as a whole.... id be questioning who the "source" is. Is it someone trying to start a conversation to effect the upcoming election.
I’ve wondered why didn’t they just extend the Metro line up to Sydenham on dedicated platforms where commuters change trains at Sydenham (like they currently do at Chatswood) and leave the rest of the T3 line alone?
That was the simple solution, but neo-liberal ideology is determining what happens along T3 and the cost and inconvenience to the public is not a concern of the LNP.
I think it should be cancelled as no way will people will accept the fact that birrong and yagoona will lose access to trains. Especially after the upgrades to those stations. The govt will lose all the Bankstown voters plus west of that. Alot of Vietnamese Bankstown community folk travel to Cabramatta and vice visa. This wont go without a fight from one of the biggest ethnic communities in Sydney. Thats for sure.
Having to change trains, and the lack of direct trains to a CBD is not a negative if those interchanges are convenient. The interchange at Bankstown is going to be super convenient. The project also will mean that more trains will be able to use the City Circle from the Inner West and East Hills Line, so the benefits are network wide.
Great great great video Sharath...the improvements just keep on coming, awesome stuff!!! And yet again...we're faced with Government stupidity resulting in gross expenditure going to waste...and also the development side...hmmmm, I wonder how many Poli's have fingers in pies of developers and the like, and what they stand to gain from further development...an interesting thought indeed...because all our Politicians are good honest hard working people wanting nothing but the best for their constituents...aren't they?? Regardless of the outcome...I'm sure they could have come up with much better uses of the $$$$ elsewhere on the either the Metro development and expansion or the heavy rail network...than to dissect the Bankstown line as they're in the process of doing at present. Another week and nearly another 1k subscribers added...I remember when it was just under 1k subscribers when I first found n subscribed...onwards and upwards still mate...great work!!!!
If you want to know what financial interests that politicians have, you can read their procunery interests declarations. If you suspect anything untoward, you can report them to ICAC.
honestly the metro shouldn’t be something that takes over already existing heavy rail corridors. it feels like a stupid idea to put so much money into converting the already existing line to metro, when they could instead be spending the money to build the metro to somewhere that isn’t serviced by any form of transport aside from busses. sure the Bankstown line was in need of station upgrades, but converting the whole thing to metro just as a way to reduce congestion feels like a bad decision. there are definitely better and more cost efficient ways to reduce congestion and i think that they should’ve just come up with a different idea completely. i do however think the line from Chatswood to Sydnham is something that should still be complete as it does serve certain areas that don’t have direct rail access. they can then decide after the completion of that section as to whether they want to make sydnham the terminus of the metro, or extend it in a different direction to serve other areas not already serviced by rail. i really just don’t think the Bankstown line conversion is needed, and they should instead just upgrade it to current heavy rail standards. that’s just my opinion though.
16:53 Nooooooo nonononononono!!!!! Please no! I just want trains that run more than every 15 mins, is that too much to ask for 😭😭😭 And it was going to be a direct line to friends living on the North Shore! If this gets cancelled, I'm going to be so upset, especially with all the disruption I've already had to put up with over the last couple of years living nearby one of the stations being converted 😭😭😭
Chill out. It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
@@user-kc1tf7zm3bAt what cost does it benefit those people? How much tax payer money has already been given and future guaranteed to leave our country ? (MTR 60% ownership) Who did the government promise contracts to develop those areas and who can afford to live in these new spaces? Does this not also affect passenger junction station traffic with higher volume boarding and alighting onto other Train services that further increase platform times on Sydney Train services. (City Circle connections for example) This will slow the network down as a whole as the City Circle is the heart of the network. I believe those funds would have been better served to building a new network giving many current and future locations access to alternative transport apart from buses. Look no further than the fastest developing areas around the edge of the urban sprawl. It all comes back to bad planning with governments allowing housing developments before upgrading infrastructure and then are forced to do so after the fact.
@@azwanazmi1484 The new Sydney Metro City & Southwest for 2025 will most certainly be of benefit and amenity for those who live along its metro corridor. The time savings benefit is without question. This is especially the case for those who need to travel beyond the Harbour Bridge, and, into the North Shore as this yields a direct link to the north. As for the economics, value and opportunity costs of the new metro line, these are another set of questions altogether. It is all way too late now to ask these questions, given the advanced state of the project’s construction. But, it has to be said, for those who look forward to the new metro in a few years time, these passengers are eagerly looking forward to its eventual opening.
As a commuter on the T3, it’s definitely not a quiet line and it’s as packed as the other lines pre covid. What I do agree is that there is no requirement of a metro if they’d run more trains during peak hour.
So sick of this "quiet line" narrative. Guaranteed if they do the stats, they would find numbers more or less the same. Right now, people who uses the T3 are treated like second-class citizens compared to people who uses the T1. Blatant discrimination if you ask me.
I think there's really two options here: 1. Carry one with the Bankstown conversion, but be 110% clear that from day 1 it will be extended through Birrong to a new interchange at Regents Park - no BS shuttles. 2. Scrap the Bankstown conversion, and from Sydenham continue on a new subsurface alignment to the airport, and on to Botany and Malabar, where it can terminate together with an extension of the light rail south along Anzac parade. Neither are ideal, but IMHO the Bankstown conversion was just a giant handout to developers, while a direct link to the airport from the Northwest is much more beneficial to ordinary people (and still provide some opportunities for regenerating Botany, which is pretty grim). At the same time, Lidcombe-St Marys should be build as regular rail, not metro. it's much more flexible, and provides the option for running fast/express airport trains to Badgery's Creek directly from the CBD.
If you ignore all the corruption in the construction industry and it’s involvement in NSW Liberal Party, the answer remains elusive. For everyone else, the reason they chose to convert this line is obvious. Metro = no pesky unions. Metro actively excludes anyone with prior union involvement, and the government wants to hand as many public assets as possible over to private, FOR PROFIT, companies - its public transport infrastructure based purely on ideology.
another great video, but i think the blaming of the strikes is just typical propaganda you see in the media. the solution doesnt fix what they originally thought, and the spend doesnt make sense anymore.
Your insider is a muppet! As an accountant on this project I can assure you having worked in sydtrains operations fr 14 yrs the running costs of running empty 8 car double deck trains was extraordinary! Crewing costs alone were 34%. The inconvenience of maybe 10 people a day who catch trains to punchbowl from Liverpool is insignificant! Feel free to reach out if you want further breakdown. The congestion is not about people more so trains traversing onto inner West local mixed up with east hills trains. 1 or 2 late trains would throw the entire network out! The EH line can't be converted as it goes through airport.
The Sydney Metro terminating at Sydenham isn't all that bad tbh. It adds to the existing network without taking anything away or drastically altering what currently exists. Making the Sydneham-Bankstown stations more accusable in the prosess is also a win.
With the congestion on the four tracks from Sydenham to Central it would be insane to terminate the metro there when you can convert one of the other lines across to metro and use those tracks. The line that is converted (in the current plan, the Bankstown line) gets faster and more frequent trips to the city, while the other lines benefit from the reduced congestion and so get additional paths and therefore more frequent services to the City. Converting any one line is a win for all lines. It would be a massive wasted opportunity to not send some of the services into the metro that are currently running through Sydenham bottleneck.
If you terminate the metro at Sydenham you’ll also need to terminate the Bankstown line at Sydenham to get the network wide benefits of removing the T3 from the Illawarra tracks and the city circle. If you don’t remove the T3 from the city you’re removing about 20tph of benefits to the rest of the sydney trains network
I have never been able to understand why you would duplicate an already existing line line with Metro when so much of Sydney has no public transport. For many years I commuted between Burwood & Bankstown (via Regents Park) I don't see how that would be possible with the Metro
It's easy. Train 1 Burwood to Lidcombe, wait ~15 minutes, train 2 Lidcombe to Bankstown. Or Burwood-Redfern-Bankstown. The people getting screwed are the ones going Campsie-Lidcombe-Paramatta or similar, who will be either changing 2-3 times or going via Redfern (almost always slower, sometimes much slower and if there are problems you're much more likely to be affected at Redfern). My commute means I'm better off on the bicycle to Strathfield then going west regardless of weather or time of day, and that's with the current nasty changes (express to Paramatta does not stop at Lidcombe). Adding a change at Bankstown will not improve that, even if the shuttle runs every ten minutes in sync with the Metro.
Simple. You either remove a line from the city circle or you add tracks to the city circle. Removing the Bankstown line from the City Circle is monumentously cheaper than adding 2 tracks (or more) to the city circle.
@Peter Cowan Privatisation of what exactly? High rise development - yes. The government has made no secret of it. The biggest problem in Australia is lack of affordable housing. That is not going to be achieved by the failed urban sprawl in outer Sydney.
If only someone could possibly have known that the line was 100 years old, with curved stations, before planning approval. If only someone could have physically inspected the infrastructure while designing and costing the project. Impossible, I know. Foolish of me to imagine it
If you know the history of the project they did - but it's a cost benefit analysis. Straightening platforms can be done, but it's horrendously expensive - you need to alter the track corridoor - resuming houses (expensive, time consuming and political nightmare), shift roads and bridges cutting off vehicle traffic, and likely partially demolish some heritage station buildings. And have substantial periods with no services so you can physically shift track. The initial proposal had some bigger changes, but required a 6-12 month shutdown of the T3 line. The community objected to that and so they went with a proposal that required more minimal changes and shorter shutdowns.. While platform edge closures will be new to Sydney, it's proven rail technology in many cities overseas.
@@mark123655 did they use the same guys who commissioned rolling stock that couldn't manage the grade of the Lane Cove River section of track, or the guys who commissioned rolling stock too large for the tunnels, or the guys who commissioned light rail whose chassis cracked with a few months' use? Outstanding!
@@ColinMcCormack at least have your facts right. The cracked trams were delivered in 2013. The Blue mountains trains was a choice between altering 100yo tunnels to modern standards, or having to buy a train fleet that was different in dimensions to the rest of the network. Plenty of tradeoffs in decision making
Honestly can't understand the inner city placement of the line. The waterloo station is in a bad spot, on Redferns backdoor. They should have either made the line further west at Sydney University, or further east, closer to the large double public housing towers are.
Cancelling the the Bankstown extension is shortsighted. The problems outlined will largely go away if they decide to extend it to Liverpool now, instead of waiting 20 years. Liverpool also needs some higher density development. I do not understand this only going half way mentality. Stopping at Sydenham is just silly. Public transport like Metro is expensive, but we need to invest in the future.
Just discovered your channel, nice work, subbed. From a fellow RUclipsr in Sydney who went full time Youtubing with 10k subs 11 years ago, so keep it up!
There are those like myself who do not support converting heavy rail corridors to a metro style rapid transit system, I am not against the metro concept, if its built in certain area's of Sydney to reduce traffic congestion, meaning it should have been built to the confines of the older parts of Sydney suburbia that was once serviced by the now long lost tram network, there are those who think that a metro should be built to the outer suburbs of the north & south west of Sydney, and it maybe an answer to reducing car usage in the short term, but in my opinion that is a mistake that most "transport planners" make these days, building a metro network for past/present day usage, forgetting about the distant future, where heavy rail maybe required, the present situation of conversion of the Bankstown line was a mistake, but too much money has been spent on it now to reverse that decision, what now needs to be considered where to direct the line after Bankstown, one option is split the path in two directions, one towards Liverpool over a new alignment, the other towards Lidcombe & continue to connect with the now planned Hunter St to Parramatta metro, I am also wondering why a metro has not be planned & started for the northern beaches. No matter what type of new rail corridors, heavy or metro, it is far better than wasting taxpayers money on building more expensive roads that only encourage more people to drive to work, and also make them pay to use them.
A lot of local communities (between Liverpool and Bankstown) don't even want their trains to go to Bankstown - - says a lot about Bankstown... its council and so on and so forth 😂
A few things to mention in addition to this video...... 1. The Metro are single deck cars, so carry fewer passengers. 2. Maybe there has been a decrease in the number of passengers yet look at where units are being built. 3. The number of new units being built in Bankstown lately has gone through the roof, no pun intended 4. The Metro has very limited seating, so 95% of passengers will be standing while traveling in either direction. You've had a long, hard day at work and now you have to stand on your way home? It is 5am and the train is busy and you are half asleep yet have to stand on your way to work, being half asleep? 5. Since the same tracks are being used, unlikely it will save time unless the stopping pattern changes which means fewer services for some stations, not more. The same speed restrictions will have to apply. 6. Does anyone really trust a train without a real human being at the front and a guard to ensure passenger safety? 7. the Libs made it illegal for the mainstream media to publish any negative news re the Metro going from Chatswood outwards so it would appear to be a good network. Appearance does not always equal reality or facts. 8. They say they have computers to detect if someone is in the corridor on the Bankstown line. Every Driver knows the issue regarding the Ibis birds on the Bankstown line and how dumb they are and get hit multiple times a day. Can you imagine the Metro's computer system stopping a train because it detects something in the corridor only for it to be a bird? Moving or eradicating the Ibis birds from their natural habitat could be an environmental disaster 9. There is no issue with trains from the Bankstown and Illawarra lines at Sydenham as they don't cross paths at all....Bankstown trains used to go on P1&2, Illawarra Trains on P5&6. Illawarra trains do not even go around City Circle....it is like an isolated line on its own. These are just some points to consider and are from the top of my head.
While other Metro lines are/will be good for Sydney, Metro Southwest is just there for the Liberal Party developer mates. Instead, they should build underground metro rail lines (w/ corresponding high rise apartment towers) from Edgecliff to Vaucluse and from North Sydney to Mosman. Perfect locations for it.
Great video! However, when trying understand why build the Metro rail extension out to Bankstown, you have to look at the politics of it (remember, the LNP will eventually privatise if it is completed). The LNP get the political kudos in their electoral base of NW Sydney, and deliver the big finger to SW Sydney residents from Marrickville to Bankstown with never ending transport disruption. It is the safe Labor seats that have to live through this disruption while safe LNP seats get what they need. The Bankstown extension is for privatisation purposes only, ie a bigger asset will make it easier to sell when the time comes. Again we see wealthier parts of Sydney getting what they need at the expense of poorer Sydney. Go look at state electoral distribution maps, the Red Rooster line and the actual proposed SW Metro line. Its pretty obvious....and guess who gets to pay for it all...we the taxpayers! And of course, in time there will be LNP politicians who retire to a highly paid directorship with the Metro Rail corporation....just like Nick Greiner has done with the toll road builders.
You haven't mentioned one particular motivation for conversion of an existing line to the new driverless technology: It takes a number of stations out of Sydney Trains management and puts them under Metro management. This is gold for a government that loves privatisation and doesn't like unionised drivers striking. I've followed this project for years (since well before COVID), attended engineering and community presentations on it, etc. And it really is largely about pulling one line's worth of traffic off the City Circle, as far as I can tell. Why not a more popular line, then? The cynic in me says that if they do it with the least popular line, the potential number of whingers about having to change trains or having services disrupted for years for construction is lower. OK, then why not just create another parallel track through the city heavy-rail style rather than Metro style? See: privatisation, excuses for development uplift that there will be with more frequent service, etc.
Let's face it, the government likes the idea of automatic train operation as provided by Sydney Metro, as in theory it equates to lower manpower costs over the long term and virtually no lost time through industrial action. Had the plan been to connect Chatswood with Central or even Sydenham, then it made some sense (especially with an extension the other end to Schofields). Converting Sydenham to Bankstown to Metro never really made any sense whatsoever for many of the reasons set out in the video. It was just a way of enhancing the manpower and lost time benefits of Metro, at a pretty steep current cost.
Agree. The cost savings in not having drivers are more than outbalanced by the 50 or more Metro executives that have salaries greater than $300K. The whole metro project was ideologically driven from the get-go by Galdys and co when she was transport minister. Rail transport growth was and is needed, but the penny pinching in the specifications of the T2 metro tunnels & bridges to not be compatible with the existing suburban train fleet, is now costing the state $billions. And the conversion of Bankstown line to metro is all about selling real-estate, and getting punch drunk on stamp-duty so they can splurge money on things that are superficial, like replacing Penrith Football stadium
I do not understand the obsession with Metro style railways. As visitors we caught the Metro from Chatswood to not quite the end of line. While it was fast, it had curious acceleration and braking as does London's Dockland's driverless train. There is no rolling into a curve. It is either brake or accelerate to speed. The Metro was uncomfortable and quite rough. I think we left the Metro at Epping and travelled back to central Sydney by proper train in what felt like luxury travel. Smooth, quiet and in comfortable seats. But the trip was so slow. I've subsequently learnt that it was because of timetable padding. What is the need for Metro to the south west of Sydney? New tracks, better signalling, new stations and some untangling of trains junctions, normal trains can do the same as a Metro. Trains are fast, if they aren't hobbled and get a clear run.
I never thought this was a good idea to begin with. Logistically it would have made sense to not go to Sydenham and instead continue the underground metro corridor from Waterloo to Little Bay.
I agree, the limited resources should be channeled into new services into areas currently lacking a rail service of any type. More, wide spread public transport is needed, not this waste of money on needlessly replacing an existing and fully functional heavy rail with a Metro rail.
Speculation and rumour is just that. There is constant assessment across projects like this for many reasons. There is nothing to suggest this project will not follow through until completion. I watch a lot of these videos as I do find them interesting and I respect the effort put in as I'm always curious about the history of my city, but to suggest a project might be shutting down with absolutely no backup or evidence does nothing but to worry and scare people.
It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
I will say as a former resident in Sydney, i grew up in Rockdale on the T4 Illawarra and Eastern Suburbs line. If the Metro was planned to Hurstville. It would be better than Bankstown. The only downside would be at peak times as some T8 services run via Sydenham rather than Wolli Creek and they share tracks with the T3 Bankstown line from the City Circle to Sydenham. It would be a nuisance for the T8 via Sydenham as there are no connections from the T4 tracks at Wolli Creek to the tracks that connect to Turrella. Also, if Metro was to run down to Hurstville. It would be a big benefit. I was down in Sydney not long ago. It's a pain that if you we're heading inbound towards the CBD in the evening. You would be stuck on all-stoppers if you lived between Allawah and Arncliffe especially in evening times. The Metro would solve that as the T4 heading outbound frequency is between Hurstville, Cronulla and Waterfall. Services to Cronulla and Waterfall would be shared as some services do Hurstville via Banksia or Wolli Creek. Cronulla and Waterfall usually at evening go via Hurstville. So, if in summary if Metro was to go down via Hurstville. It would take over most services on the T4 to Hurstville and T4 Services will focus usually on Cronulla and Waterfall usually limited or express services. Also, some services whether City or Outbound would have delays of Hurstville, City and Illawarra services merging at Wolli Creek the Metro would solve.
What is so special about Punchbowl to Liverpool? It is only half hour service between Liverpool the city via Bankstown even at peak hour. Most trains and passengers go via Lidcombe. What about that original choice of Bankstown or Hurstville. For someone who doesn't think people should change trains how about all those people heading to south of Hurstville, a much busier station than Bankstown? As for the project being cancelled I expect Labor to cancel all Coalition projects, road, rail everything. That is because politics is so tribal Labor will not want to open any project started by their predecessors. The narrative will be the Coalition did nothing in 12 years. It is only public money being wasted.
Cancellation and restoration of the full rail line, the existing corridor could be upgraded to increase speed and reliability for far less then the metro conversion.
I Love The Concept Of The Southwest Metro And It Will Bring That Line Back To Life So I Really Want The Southwest Metro To Be Built I Loved The Video Also Sharath
Completely agree! If you're keen to help make sure the South West Metro get built, would love your support signing the petition below (youtube doesn't allow links so you just need to replace the word DOT with actual full stops. Thank you! savemetro DOT good DOT do/sydney
I think they should have kept the existing train line and built an additional metro line beneath the existing train line. Inevitably the population will grow in these areas and it's ideal to have two lines to alleviate congestion. Great video :) 😃🚅
Connect the Bankstown Metro to Sydney Olympic Park and the West Metro. Then convert the T5 from Leppington through Liverpool to Parramatta. It does several things. Connects the Western Sydney airport to Liverpool and Parramatta. Connects the Canterbury Bankstown supports to their home ground. Connects WSA to the city via Metro. The list goes on.
congrats on trending :-) my only hopes with our public transport is for the T4 to finally get the same trains as everyone else,,, i want working air-conditioning and movable seats -_-‘ i sure hope all this turns out okay.
As someone who has used the Bankstown line regularly for many years, there really isn’t any problem that the metro needs to solve. Adding the metro would have slight improvements like faster and more frequent services, but neither of those was ever really an issue, especially not one that needs to be solved with this much disruption to the line in the interim.
A (the?) new government would take great pleasure and probably win support from the rest of the state by cancelling this wasteful project and terminating the metro at Sydenham which could then be developed as more of a centre.
Hi Sharath, I also have another concern for the Sydney Metro Southwest that you really don't have to answer, but can if you a want to. If they'll convert old houses into highrises, it has a high possibility of investors coming in. It sounds pretty good? Well, an already struggling rental market will be more expensive, causing in many people kicked out of their affordable houses, and being prompted to rent these expensive highrises. From all this, Australia could have a very big homeless problem, similar to The United States. What is your opinion?
I agree. Removing say 100 homes from the market in an area removes 100 potential families needing a home. Currently ALL apartments are not family friendly. Excessive strata fees, bad quality, lack of off-street car parking spaces. People hate them. All it does is increase the value of the remaining homes.
It would have made more sense to go to atleast Sefton or Regents Park. At Sefton or Regents Park they could have just rebuilt a new station that handle Sydney Metro as well as Sydney Trains by more of less building a new station right beside the curent station.
Mate if you’ve tried a daily commute on the Bankstown line, you would know that it is far from fully well functioning. Unless you live at one of the express stops, everyone else has to put up with trains every 15 minutes in PEAK time.
Nothing makes sense till a project is fully complete. This an ongoing 100 year job to build and complete all sections of the metro. It will be brilliant and is a project mostly for future generations. Until then it will be bits here and bits there without them being fully linked.
A solution to the congestion would be to run double deckers from Bondi Junction through the city to Redfern then express to Sydenham and one branch express to Hurstville then to Cronulla and Waterfall, and another branch express to Revesby and then to Macarther and Leppington (and WS airport). The city circle would then provide high frequency single deckers all stops to Hurstville, Revesby, the Inner West line and poss. Epping and Liverpool.
![Eminem - Fuel (feat. JID) [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t5H_CewqpKA/mqdefault.jpg)
The cost of converting the Bankstown line is a minor part of the $17b price tag. The bulk of this cost is the tunnel under the harbour & CBD from Chatswood to Sydenham, The cost of converting the Bankstown line to metro is minor compared to building a whole new Metro line. As the video says there are many benefits to the overall rail network from converting the Bankstown line to Metro. The other conversion options such as to Hurstville weren’t feasible because this line is shared with Cronulla & Illawarra trains. Airport line would be better option but this would have added congestion on Sydenham to Central section of network as T8 trains would have to go via Sydenham.
Adding a point against upgrading the airport line. The airport is moving away to west Sydney (hopefully). Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport will become what is left of Hong Kong's Kai Tak Airport (the old HK airport). The new metro line wouldn't run for many years before the airport itself is gone.
@@serena-yu There are no plans to get rid of Kingsford Smith like they did in HK....
@@garrywallace1007 That's interesting. I didn't know about that. Is Sydney going to have 2 major airports when it has 70% the population and far less transferring visitors than HK?
@@serena-yu yes. Kingsford Smith will still be the primary airport and WSA will likely take the extra traffic or the traffic that wants to land after hours.
@@kierannelson2581It’s going to be the Gatwick or Narita of Sydney.
you put so much work into every video you make. it doesnt go un noticed by all of us
So much work but can't fix the speech impediment 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
@@lachlangreen8389 Sorry about your impediment
The benefits of taking the Bankstown line off the city circle are enormous. As flawed as this project is, that single goal alone is worth finishing it.
That said, I’ve never understood why it terminates at Bankstown. They could have fixed most of the problems by building a few extra stations towards Birrong or Regents Park, then there’s be no need for a stupid shuttle.
Sounds like you didn't watch the video through
One reason it terminates at Bankstown is because they want to eventually extend it directly to Liverpool and then to Badgery's Creek Airport via the Marion Street corridor. The train stations between Bankstown and the Western line and Liverpool are not economical stations, and they create congestion for the Western line... or something like that. But I personally hope the project is canned in favour of Metro lines elsewhere (like North Sydney to Mosman and Edgecliff to Vaucluse... those areas need tonnes of super high rise public housing apartment towers.... we can move the population of Alice Springs to Vaucluse and Mosman... that'll solve their problems).
@@ytlurker220 yea but I think the point is you could still have built it to Liverpool eventually as a split line at bankstown where the 2 lines would merge.
@@Banana_Split_Cream_Buns most people i've seen are advocating for the metro to stop 3 stations later at regents park
it may not be economical, but it allows a seemless transition.
I'm just hoping that the governement creates a north-south connection based on the shuttle route, such as a hurstville to rhodes via bankstown line or something.
basically, a giant u-turn line.
Having dead ends on a metro line (ie not connecting) is just plain dumb. As you say take it to Regents Pk at least. I would take it to Lidcombe.
I use the T3 Bankstown line nearly daily, and seeing the progress that has been made I find it hard to believe that the project will be cancelled. It is way too far into development to be stopped
Exactly, it's nearly completed, the " insider's source " might be true 2-3 years ago. All the station upgrades plus track works along the way from Sydenham-Bankstown are virtually at the last finishing touch stage.
Exactly. It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
I can tell you all the station upgrades are Window dressing. They were always happening anyways because of the Transport Access projects happening across the network. Putting in lifts and the like.
The heavy lifting of the project would have been in the 8 months the line was said to shut for to convert it.
It's unlikely but the possibility is still there
I find it hard to believe the upgrades are nearly finished if they’re talking about replacing the bankstown line with shuttles for 15 months.
@@leescharich6876 The transition and upgrade is not finished until it _is_ finished. The engineers need to take full possession of the entire rail corridor to effect the full conversion. This is not a quick and easy process, as this task is always slower compared to building a brand new line. The estimate of 15 months is perhaps rather conservative, in order to manage the expectations of the general public. The works may only take 12 months.
It is like totally renovating and remodelling a house. It is just quicker to level the existing home, then start from scratch. But, this is just not possible with the existing Bankstown Line.
Cannot agree with much here... The SW
^^THIS. I'm not sure why a video based on speculation was even made.
This is so much more helpful than the vid. Thanks
The fact the video is based on an “insider’s bad gut feeling” rang alarm bells for me. Doesn’t seem to have much basis in fact. 🤔
Thank you. So well said. I smelt a rat.... Lol
@@TopHat841 100%
Just a bit of trivia. The Bankstown Line was originally meant to turn south just past Bankstown and head for Liverpool. It would have passed near the (now puzzlingly named) Railway Parade in Connell Park and through where Bankstown airport was subsequently developed (first flattened out as an area as a job creation scheme in the depression years, then developed during WW2.) Instead we got the cheaper via Regents Park option and Bankstown services running around a full circle both ways to the City until the Lidcombe turnback was constructed.
Running the Metro a bit further to Regents Park or Sefton sounds attractive, but is a difficult (if not practically, then politically impossible) piece of engineering; what with not only the suburban tracks but the diving South Sydney Freight Line to contend with. The good news not mentioned is that Liverpool would be a winner out of the Metro arrangements, fostering reintroduction of the fast City via Regent's Park services that used to exist way back - a good 10 to 15 minutes faster than via Granville.
Cost wasn't the reason the train went north. Geography was and still probably is in 2023. The basin below the georges is not particularly good for a tunnel and then flooding also plays an issue the current line doesn't have to deal with. I agree with Harry Goldun that running single decks beyond Bankstown to Lidcombe and Liverpool should be an option with the driverless trains terminating at Banktown and new 8 car single deck trains which could run on the existing line and maybe some new line expansion north of epping to allow metro to run to hornsby on new lines over or underneath the existing main north.
This project would likely have had a lot less pushback from the local community if it extended pass Bankstown to at least Regents Park to begin with. So the T3 line would become a straight run between Liverpool and Lidcombe with an easy connection to the metro at Regents Park, getting rid of the need for an awkward shuttle service.
They could then also give the new T3 a direct line into the city by reinstating the old Liverpool to City Circle via Regents Park route that a lot of the local community want.
even merging the T7 shuttle with this upcoming awkward shuttle to become a rail route between Bankstown to Olympic Park is bit better, atleast at Olympic Park residents in Birrong and Yagoona can use Metro West there
It's been done that way for a future extension straight to Liverpool (without dealing with the triangle)..
I still retain hope that the Bankstown to Lidcombe section of track might be reused as part of a North-South line including a new underground platform at Lidcombe going to the existing Olympic Park station
@@tvTwo1 000
Might have a slight problem extending the metro to Lidcombe via Regents Park, as that section with Regents Park and Berala is technically classed as part of the Main South Line, even though in theory, that plan would be good, but terrible at the same time as all freight trains would have to go back via Granville (which some do due to the sidings in Yennora for Qube Logistics).
@@JaseyRae
there is adequete room to add another platform at regents park, though it could be hard
on second thought, uhhh it'll look actually awful to add
If one of the goals of South West Metro is to increase development and density, I would see this more as a long term city building project - especially considering the government has massively increased immigration. The higher density, and apartment style developments around the stations would facilitate the need for more capacity and frequency. I think it would be short sighted to cancel it - In my opinion.
It should not be forgotten that the Sydney metro are 6-car trains, which limits the capacity compared to trains in multiple units of 8 cars (the double decker does not significantly increase the capacity, because too many seats and stairs waste space).
I'm from Paris, so I don't know the line traffic, but the choice of an intermediate line is prudent, but not necessarily bad. Can the metro be extended to 8 cars (platforms planned for ???)
As for the cost of the project (14 billion), it seems high, but there is the whole tunnel section under the CBD, plus the remodeling of the stations and the automation.
For the rest, the Sydney metro seems to follow the example of our RER, which uses suburban lines, with a tunnel under the centre.
The only difference for us, is the non-automation, and the fact that 223/245 m trains run there, because we took the length of the suburban quays as a reference at the time.
Quality of the building, not quantity. It's a fiasco right now with builders breaching building standards
@Peter Cowan In terms of seat yes, in terms of space (standing or seated) no. The longitudinal Asian configurations allow enormous capacities, superior to the double decker.
@Peter Cowan I agree that you lose comfort (though personally I find crush capacity on Sydney trains more unpleasant than on Sydney Metro), but I disagree that you lose capacity. RM Transit has a great video explainer about this: by having single deck trains with slightly less capacity but far more doors, you can vastly decrease the amount of stopping time at each station, and therefore run more trains. It seems counter-intuitive that a smaller train would lead to an overall capacity increase, but it does stack up. This assumes they do the right thing and run a train every 90-120 seconds as seen in London. If they run them at the same frequency as Sydney trains, then your point stands.
Your insider seems to have an agenda and has resulted in a very one-sided video. I'd suggest looking at the STAR project, particularly the Erskineville crossover and how that is planned to alter the service pattern on those lines (illawarra, south coast, east hills, and southern highlands lines), as well as the promised additional services on the illawarra and south coast lines as evidence that the removal of the Bankstown trains will open up space for additional services to ease the congestion on those other lines you mention as being congested. It is also following the overall transport plan and even in line with the old clearways projects (it gives the benefits of the previously proposed clearways sextuplification, but with a new corridor and stations from Sydenham to Central). Does it really matter whether Bankstown or Hurstville ends up being metro, as long as the two lines are given separate paths into Central so as to allow more services?
As far as the old infrastructure, you've shown some of the work that they're doing, why is this a problem for the project, they seem to have reasonable solutions already in progress (and platform screen doors are a great safety idea, metro or otherwise).
You should consider the figures they gave you for the cost of converting the Bankstown line, they seem to be almost the entire cost of the project, surely that's not correct!
The union issue is a pain and is causing issues, but is that really related to the decision to convert the Bankstown line?
And the multi billion dollar project with the issue that it needs to build secure climb-resistant fences! Is that really something that needs much thought put into how it will be solved, maybe you should contact Sydney Metro and ask them, or even look at what they are already doing to solve that exact problem between Chatswood and the Atarmon dive, rather than put it out there as a critical issue for the project.
I understand the issues with the almost orphaned stations and think that needs discussion, but would benefit from a less one-sided argument (what are the patronage figures here?).
And as for cancelling it, what are the political views expressed by Labor? It's a high profile expensive project, are they making noise about cancelling it?
I know from your other videos that you have the capability to research and critically analyse things and really hope that you revisit this subject soon with some more information from your own research and analysis rather than parroting some secret "insider's" views without challenging them.
I wonder if the current Government knows it is best to cancel this project but is leaving it as a poisoned chalice to a (likely) upcoming Labor government.
The current government will, based on all polls, get booted in March. It is easier for the new government to cancel it and blame the last guy but they also run the risk of reminding people of their less than stellar record on starting and then canceling projects such as their infamous inner city metro
Morrison government did that with the housing market, climate change and the RBA/Inflation issue 😂
Nonsense. It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
Thanks for this intresting presentation.
Having lived in this country for nearly 70 years I have seen some mind boggling disasters brought about by our bureaucrats, but I really can't believe that they would cancel this project.
It's because the project won't be cancelled. Both sides of politics back the project. It will be finished. It's a poor video.
@@TopHat841 Exactly, the " insider's source " may be true 2-3 years ago. All the stations upgrade + trackwork along the way from Sydenham-Bankstown are virtually at the last finishing touch stage. Yep, both parties want it, zero chance it will be cancelled, the bombshell from his " insider " is a dud.
i agree, i used to live on the bankstown line when the heavy rail was used, and it took 45 mins to get to strathfield, for an inter-connecting train to hornsby....so with the upgrade to the bankstown line to metro, would be significantly greater for the people who live on the line, to get to work in the city, with far more frequent trains (metro) than the standard timetable of the heavy rail trains before the upgrade commenced.
Frequency is not a big deal for commuters. They plan to get the same train each day at a time that suits.
Absolutely ridiculous how successive government destroyed a properly good train line. I can guarantee those clowns who designed the timetable and schedule the trains live NOWHERE NEAR any of the train stations sWest of Bankstown. Those clowns couldn't care less about people who need to use the train stations from Cabramatta to Lidcombe/Bankstown, tbh.
To me, it's blatant discrimination against people who live in the suburbs near these train stations, as if they are unimportant and second class citizens (compared to rest of Sydney, I mean even Penrith LOL)
@@listohan what kind of non-sense - there are no random commuters on that train line? T3 users are really that special? LMAO. The blatant lies and propaganda narratives spewed out by bureaucrats. You really think everyone are low IQ and stupid?
@@erroreliminator2.076 it is to encourage more people to go to the city. Besides, bozo's should get a car.
I think what might save the project is by extending the soon to be Light Rail stage 2, that stops at Carter St to streets that connect Lidcombe-Regent stations leading to Auburn Rd and then connect the Light Rail line to the Birrong-Bankstown stations, by doing this you'll encourage new development around the areas.
Congratulations on another great insightful video. The extension of the metro to Bankstown was never a perfect solution to anything but was seen as the best answer to multiple problems with Sydney Trains and the congestion around the City Circle. I now live in Melbourne and the State government is spending $12.5 billion dollars to create more space around the city loop by adding a new line through the CBD. This means that more trains can be run on the existing suburban lines increasing overall capacity. Converting the T3 Bankstown line to metro will solve the City Circle problem at a fraction of the cost that Melbourne is facing.
I have spent 11 years of my life living overseas on and off and I have previously cringed with embarrassment when I return to Sydney and experience our transportation infrastructure. So much of Sydney trains operation is 19th century with platform staff with a white and red flag and a guard at the back of the train sticking his head out the door as a train approaches a curved platform. What can he see? It is absurd. The NIF trains have been declared to be safe by independent international experts, but the Unions won’t have it. Melbourne has DOO trains. If the ALP is elected, I am sure they will cancel the T3 conversion. They are controlled by the Unions and they don’t want to bring us into the 21st century.
The Sydney Metro project is truly world-class and I am always amazed that an Australian government had the vision and the courage to proceed with it rather than being limited by the Sydney Trains hierarchy who still seem to be back in the 20th century. I don’t have much hope for future Metro expansion if the ALP are in power. I am simply glad that we had a period of great vision when the Metro was introduced.
Nice video. I have worked for 5 years on the Metro and have worked on the Sydenham to Bankstown section up until mid last year.
Some facts about upgrading to Metro.
1. The overhead voltage is the same. The track is the same. The signaling is twice as close and modernised, the points removed and track renewed, and this is what allows the increase of trains on the network. These benefits will flow onto the existing rolling stock if the Metro in this section is canned
2. The corridor width is not changing and is only able to support 4 lines. To install the Metro it means it has to use two of the existing lines. If you observe these train lines you will notice diesel locomotives pulling rolling stock and containers in and out of Port Botany onto these lines and it is very busy. So 4 lines for Freight / Passenger will turn into 2 lines for Freight and 2 lines for Metro. There is no redundancy this way
3. Metro is old technology and the trains are limited to 100kph. This is no better than the current trains whose speed is limited to the conditions of the track. We have ruined the opportunity to use our brains and install high speed rail and true high speed trains as in the European countries. In fact our trains today go slower than the red rattlers of the war time era.
4. In my opinion the true benefits of the project are the purses of John Holland and Lang O Rourke who are the main contractors working on building the Metro. It is very sad like you mention that all this money is not being well spent when there are so many other rail projects that could provide so much more tangible benefits.
Good video and thanks for making it
I've worked on the Sydenham to Bankstown project for 4 years. While I am bound by confidentiality and cannot explain my reasons, I do not agree with the speculation from the 'insider'. It would be catastrophic for all involved if we were to believe that speculation.
@Peter Cowan well, the nsw government says that it doesn't want to upgrade sydney trains anymore
(i think I heard it from some building beautifully video, can't remember)
but r u kidding me?! Sydney trains awesomeness is flexibility, just look at the flying junctions.
it would've been cheaper to just have metro be potentially cross compatible with trains.
liberals, not allowing trains to liberally convert to metro.
:facepalm:
@Peter Cowan I don't work there anymore. At a guess I would say you are correct. There would be changes to be made to convert it back to normal rail but the 'improvements' could be rolled on
The reason the Bankstown line was chosen is that property developers control the NSW government. Any other logistical justification is window dressing around the insatiable desire of property developers for real estate.
Source please
@@AlphaGeekgirlyou would like me to provide a citation in support of my contention that the NSW government is controlled by property developers? Sure! Let's start here: https: // en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rum_Rebellion
@@ColinMcCormack Maybe something a bit more up to date. Most if not all cities around the world are building high rise for very sound urban planning reasons. Why would Sydney be any different? I would be more annoyed if they were encouraging unsustainable urban sprawl.
I don’t think cancelling will save much money because the contracts are already signed. I agree that the Bankstown line was not the best line to convert as it’s not the busiest line. But removing it from the city circle still frees up capacity for extra services for T8 and T2, so they should just see it through.
Signed contracts can be terminated with penalties. It will still save billions.
@@gregessex1851 Won't save a damn thing. The original cost of the conversion was 1-1.5b, estimates that it's ballooned to roughly $2b. Contracts are already signed and this is just the first stage of an extended line to Liverpool (not to mention freeing up space in the City Circle). Neither side of politics in NSW is going to cancel this. I have no idea where he gets the $17b figure (it's $18.5b for the entire Chatswood-Bankstown line, does he really think the tunnel's only cost a billion?) and someone having "a feeling" is not credible reporting.
@@BlackGateofMordor It will save money if there are works that are not carried out. Awarding a contract doesn’t mean you having to pay out the total value of the contract if it is not completed
@@gregessex1851 it won’t save billions the cost of the conversion of the SW section is tiny compared to the whole project from chatswood.
Being less busy made it ideal for conversion, less people to disrupt and it also means it’s an under-utilised corridor. Some stations only get 4tph in the peak and they will get 15tph when metro opens. That will make the corridor much better utilised.
Your videos keep getting better mate. Well done!!!!
If the Sydney metro is terminating at Sydenham, it means another train line at Sydenham. This may improves the access from Sydenham to North Sydney while not creating inconvenience to the existing bankstown line corridor.
I think they should make extend sydney metro west to the northern beaches via another rail tunnel under the sydney harbour to Manly, then elevated through the northern beaches. Much better than the road tunnel option
It’s too late for that. Platforms 1 and 2 are already converted to metro
@@electro_sykes Sydney Metro West will be extended to the South East, that’s the direction the stub tunnels will be dug for a future extension.
*more inconvenience. Terminating at Lidcombe was a huge inconvenience already, on top of that, they used to run Inner West trains only as far as Homebush. A mate who lived in Berala but worked in Newtown had to get three trains to work instead of the one... (It's two now, but still)
@@electro_sykesgood luck telling the people that live there that. They are more OT less rich snobs that do not want any public transport
Seriously, is everyone too young to remember the Bankstown Line before 2013???
The Bankstown Line was NEVER the original cause of the congestion in the city; the govt made it that way themselves by snapping up the Bankstown loop in 2013 so that Banko trains terminate at Lidcombe and they use the flyover to loop and return to Bankstown from the city causing the congestion.
Meanwhile BEFORE 2013, the Inner West line was a thing: City to Livo via Regents Park. And these two lines would trade with each other on the city circle without blocking any other trains: ex-Inner West and ex-Fairfield trains run clockwise in the city then run to either Bankstown or East Hills via the airport, while ex-Bankstown and ex-East Hills trains run anticlockwise and depart off to the Inner West or to Fairfield. They should’ve brought THAT old plan back and the congestion would be over. Problem solved.
Meanwhile the ‘Metro’ should’ve gone to Hurstville. Especially with how some massive crowds of people heading into the Sutherland Shire sometimes struggle to get onto completely packed trains where about 85% of passengers already onboard would be getting off at stations between Arncliffe and Hurstville.
(By the way, no. I am not connected in any way with those ridiculously extremist and irrational ‘Restore Inner West Line’ and anti-Metro groups. This is my own view as someone who commutes between Fairfield and Cronulla, and also was living in Bankstown before.)
By the way, buses are still an
important mode. For Punchy to Livo noted at 14:22, the longer, but less hassle way is to get the train one stop to Bankstown, and then M90 bus all the way straight to Liverpool.
Excellent video. One of the aims of converting the Bankstown line to Metro was to reduce conjestion on the city circle. Bradfield, way back in the 1920s, anticipated the need, with trains from Wynyard, crossing the Harbour bridge on the eastern side, going through tunnels at North Sydney, and continuing to serve the Northern Beach suburbs. The tunnels were started at North Sydney. Conversion of this corridor to the Cahill Expressway in about 1960, adding the ugly viaduct across Circular Quay could have been addressed with a road tunnel as part of a metro link into the city from Chatswood - the transport corridor still exists for extra raillines. This is a missed opportunity to also improve the Circular Quay area.
John Bradfield also specified four tracks on the north shore line. He also stated that the north shore line needed a connection to Epping to allow the network to function if a disruption occurred.
@@ForTheBirbs That's why Epping Road is as wide as it is now (apart from the sections deliberately narrowed to encourage use of the Lane Cove Toll Tunnel). The rail connection would have paralleled Epping Road.
Excellent point but what is bellow the Cahill Expressway is the City Circle line at Circular Quay therefore you need to modify both Railway line and the Expressway itself if allowed to do so
@@ForTheBirbs would be tricky to quad track from Milsons point to Chatswood
@@ktipuss and why electrical infrastructure was provisional in Lane Cove Tunnel
i feel like the state government should’ve stuck with double decker compatible heavy rail from the start.
@Peter Cowan they literally support car dependancy
Wow, would love to know more about the Victoria road corridor, never thought of it as being in a transit drought even after your stodes episode.
Sydneysider here, born and breed within Western Sydney. This video was well organised, informative, thought out and thorough. Well done! Great work! Keep it up! Subscribed!
i think also the delay is due to Sydney having too little people to finish the project quickly.
Hi Sharath, thanks for including this video. As I previously lived at Marrickville on the Bankstown line, this area is of special interest to me. It is quite amazing all the changes that have occurred up there and it will be interesting to see how Sydney Metro progresses, especially in this area. Anyway, take care. Rob in Melbourne Australia.
The Sydenham to Bankstown section could be cancelled? Awesome! The whole line from Sydenham to Bankstown should just have their stations upgraded to modern standards with DDA compliance and modernised signs. It's been riddled with corruption from the beginning and was one of the stupidest projects to ever be invisaged. End the metro at Sydenham and turn off the blowtorch searing through the state government's wallet.
Thanks very much for an interesting video. Glad Paul is supporting you as well with his research. I have to agree about all these projects that don't link up and are dead end or creating more changes from Metro to Heavy etc. Same thing with why they dug up the Carlingford line to convert to Light Rail and didn't continue it to link up with the other 2 modes at Epping. I have a photo from the old Carlingford station of a map of the area that even shows a possible ancient plan to continue the Carlingford or whatever line to Epping. wee are subscribed.
There was a plan (PECRL) to extend the Carlingford as part of a planned heavy rail line from Chatswood - Epping - Parramatta (maybe branching off from the also-planned NW heavy rail west of Epping, which would have been great) but it was abandoned in the repeated starts, stops and changes to transport projects (dating from the 1930s !). The remnant was the useful Chatswood - Epping link, and the NW Metro uses that and then follows more or less the path of the old NW heavy rail plan. As the Carlingford line terminates in a valley it would seem possible to tunnel to Epping from there if it was still heavy rail, as a surface HR line would never get approved in that area. But a LR would probably want to be on the surface. When was the plan you photographed from?
I've been using the T3 from Belmore for over 20 years. The simple solution to preventing T3 congesting the city circle was to terminate T3 at Sydenham and have us change trains there. The $2 billion spent on T3 could have been spent taking Metro somewhere from Sydenham that doesn't already have a rail line or building up up the northern beaches where there is plenty of congestion.
Changing trains at Sydenham is no big deal. We've already been doing it for years as they build metro and before that when track work regularly closed T3 all the way to the city.
But the metro wasteful rebuild of T3 is all about de-unionising rail travel and building 8-12 story apartments without public amenities and infrastructure the length of both sides of the T3 line.
And when its privatised, I expect on what we've seen with privatisation so far that those alleged 4 minute intervals between trains will blow out and prices will rise each year by 4% or inflation, whichever is higher.
I'd be surprised if its cancelled. Its too far advanced, even with all the problems. The cost will instead blow out further.
Who wants to change trains at Sydenham if you live on the Bankstown line. A big FAT no one!
@@fanmael1 if you live on the T3, then you've changed trains at Sydenham many times over the past years and its no big deal. If you want to go to Bondi or Cronulla or Ashfield, or Olympic park, you have to change trains and its no big deal. If you have used a metro overseas, changing trains is normal and no big deal.
Now the state government is giving very little building uplift to Hurlstone Park, but is to every other station on the Syd to Bankstown line. It begs the question, why?
It's undoubtedly the case that pushing high rise development was a main driver for the metro conversion, over and above any other benefits it may have had. I think the state government saw how the Epping link turned out (eg all the development at the North Ryde station) and said "let's do more of that". Particularly the big juicy slab of land between Canterbury west of Cook's River and Bankstown.
Unfortunately, having driven through Bankstown recently, I'm not convinced that the quality of development is very high. The blocks are either too tall or too close together. They're not spaced to let light through so there mist be some real sunless caverns in there.In the best Sydney tradition, I suspect all the new builds will be mediocre and horribly overpriced (both for renters and owner-occupiers).
Still at least there's some chance the whole thing might get finished eventually. Look at the whole Top Ryde and Melrose Park developments, based on light rail lines that got cancelled. But hey they made the road wider.
I can understand your enthusiasm for high density- me not so much but agree to differ etc- but I think in NSW we haven't got a clue how to do it well. I can think of an occasional well done locations- the new stuff on Broadway opposite UTS at Central for example- but a lot of it is badly designed and is aimed at maximising developer profit rather than aesthetics or amenity.
Almost impossible to cancel the metro at this late stage. Apart from the break costs (payout) it amounts to defaulting on a contract - governments almost never do this as it will affect the state's credit rating, meaning downgraded AAA to AA or B and paying higher interest and less willingness by private sector investment. Look what happened to Eastlink in Melbourne. What they *could* do is "stage" the project, ie, finish up to Sydenham only, provided the contract allows this.
This is one of my or my favourite channel on RUclips I watch all your videos and love them every time! Keep up the good work 🎉
During the early 1970’s I regularly travelled from Ermington to Sydney CBD to work. This took me 1hr 20mins. Today, in 2023, I’m retired and living in Maitland. It now takes the same time (1hr 20mins) to travel across Maitland by bus, a 15 min journey by car.
Yes, the car will still be king of transport for at least the next 50-100 years, I see NO other ways of even lessen the importance of this private mode of transport.
The MAIN REASON that the Bankstown conversion to Metro going ahead is the simple fact that running a shorter Metro service to Sydenham is not financially viable enough for them. They need the track to be over 65km long and extending it to Bankstown makes the Metro line 66km in length.
Love your content mate! While very informative, I could not agree with your insider with his "gut feeling" of project being cancelled. And with Labor now committing to complete the Sydenham to Bankstown conversion to metro, I hope this topic can be put to rest.
It was obvious that cancelling the project would've costed much more to the taxpayer than simply finishing it. I say this because by the time of the state election, so much work has been done to the point that it would've been irreversible. Because it wasn't just upgrading the stations to be more accessible like your insider stated, there were SEVERAL major construction points added to the project since it started: All the metro power and substations (since the metro needs its own power source outside of the heavy rail one), all the metro cabling and conduits installed and connected to each station (from Sydenham to Bankstown), raising the platforms and adding the mechanical gap filler equipment, the new infrastructure built at Bankstown (new metro platforms opposite the existing island platform), the removal of the Bankstown and Campsie rail alignment (which would allow trains to terminate at Bankstown and Campsie respectively) AND, the plan to increase rail capacity on the Illawarra line, taking up platforms 3 to 6 at Sydenham station. Couple this with the existing platforms 1 and 2 (where trains to and from the Bankstown line used to stop) now fully converted to metro, and this would've made it near IMPOSSIBLE to keep the Bankstown line on heavy rail. All of this was well past planning and in its construction phase, some of which were at near completion by the time Labor came into government.
It would've been highly irresponsible of EITHER political party to cancel a project so deep in its development, where many billions were spent and several infrastructure points at near competition. IMO Labor are simply playing politics with the metro projects, saying they are "saving" the metro south west and metro west. More like trying to claim the projects as their own and throwing away any correlation they had to the Liberal party. But that's just my take on the whole situation.
In any case, lets see the metro south west project to its end and hope it improves all those who live along the corridor. Cheers :)
I lived at Yagoona years ago and used to catch an express train to the city. When Gladys came along as Transport Minister, she changed that so the express trains started at Bankstown. It basically meant that everyone travelling to the city from Yagoona (and I assume also Birong) had to change at Bankstown anyway...
@Peter Cowan butchering? 😂😂😂
@Peter Cowan Butchering? World class?? You’ve lost me on both
the liberals do not support public transport and if they could, they would remove all of Sydney's railways and replace them with more freeways.
@Peter Cowan they are supporters of car dependancy
@@electro_sykes The trouble with that claim is the current government has spent more on public transport than any government ever had
I had a lot to do with the metro line from Chatswood to Sydenham with Rockwell Automation. We manufacturered 172 control panels, each of them up to 2300mm tall and up to 1800mm long for the TCC panels. We made emergency evacuation panels (EVP), one for each station (its 9, right?), a server panel and other controllers & PLCs for the tunnnel ventilation.
That doesn't include the drives (VSDs), i don't know how many there were as i wasn't controlling that undertaking.
The point i want to make is about the challenges of COVID and the great chip shortage, which has slowed down a lot of industries. Rockwell came up with a course of action to get through the production backlog and foresees a return to normal by March 2024.
Any project that requires industrial computing & logic processing will be delayed. In saying that, yes there have been other factors, but the scene was already set.
I have experienced the Seoul Metro system. I first came across it in 1993 when roads in that city were not closed off but rather bottle-necked to allow for underground tunnel and related construction works. I have revisited Seoul on a number of occasions since and am impressed how the Korean Metro systems work. Each line is independent of each of the other lines and there are numerous lines. Each line crosses each of the other lines of the system at least once. Each line carries its own individual line number code and its own individual colour code. Each station has its own line-station number together with a station name. Seoul Forest station, as an example, has a station number indicating its line number followed by its position number on the line ( e.g. Station 123 is that station between stations 22 and 24 on line 1 with line 1 having its own colour code). When I first confronted the Seoul Metro system map I was shelled shocked because there is so much to take in but once I worked it out I could, as one not able to read and speak Korean, get around.
I will state that Metro systems tend to be underground and above ground and not on ground.
That's why I hate the light rail or tram, running on the ground with shared traffic is so ancient and dangerous. Imagine Sydney dug up its 19th Century tram network nearly 60 years ago only to revert back to that crap. On the other hand, if the metro and tram have their own separate right of way as underground tunnel or elevated track, then I am all for it.
When I first saw the plans for the southwest metr I, for some reason, assumed they'd build the metro underground under the existing stations and repurposed the land above for more development. Probably not possible or too slow to build or whatever. Would be a real shame if the metro they build suffers from many of the old lines problems.
There wouldn’t be much point putting it underground as a lot of the length also has freight lines next to it so you wouldn’t really be freeing up the corridor.
I will defiently miss the bankstown train line but im also excited to see how it all looks when it opens next year😊
Thanks for a really interesting video that covered many issues!
Transport-oriented development doesn't require the Bankstown line to be a Metro, as far as I can see, so it can still happen.
A transit system that requires 2 or 3 changes just to get from outlying areas to the city (or even nearby areas) is effectively NOT that rapid. Changing trains takes time and is a PITA for commuters who already have a long distance to travel. This may actually *discourage* use of the system.
The report you mention rightly points out that converting the Sydenham - Bankstown line eliminates flexibility. For instance, it's possible to run western line trains via Sydenham and Auburn with the current system. I have travelled on Blue Mountains services using this diversion several times. It is useful in cases of trackwork or other disruptions. It also precludes any service (say) between Western Sydney and the South East (there actually used to be a Penrith - Bankstown - Cronulla service).
The money spent to upgrade stations on the Bankstown line would not all be wasted if the Metro extension is cancelled. And if it's going to cost further billions it might be a case of cutting losses. Surely refurbishment, improved access, and safety is useful whether it's Metro OR Heavy Rail. Maybe even some of the improved signalling would be useful. Hopefully not too much money has been spent on platform screen doors etc..
The industrial dispute over the NIF were justified IMO. The then government's anti-union stance led to them trying to eliminate guards, which with the reduced passenger care and poor visibility (via CCTV to the driver), due to curved platforms and heavy weather being a real issue in the Blue Mountains, for instance.
Extending the Metro to Sydenham (and also to Schofields) would still help ease stress on the system and makes sense.
Corruption is the unknown factor in situations like this.
So many of these problems could have been fixed if the North West Rail Link was never decided to be a standalone line using automated trains. If it had used the same rolling stock and signalling as the rest of the Sydney railway network, then it could have had trains to the city from the beginning, and future projects now under the Metro brand would have been simpler too. The Chatswood-Sydenham link could still have been built (it's been planned for a long time), and even if Bankstown Line services had been redirected to use the new tunnel instead of going to the City Circle, the line would still have been compatible with other trains, and it would have been possible to have other service patterns on it in case of disruption or trackwork elsewhere (like the way Western Line trains are rarely diverted via Bankstown when the Inner West line is closed). It would have also required much less extensive upgrades at Bankstown Line stations. Sure, Metro-type trains are better in most ways than classic double-decker trains, but do their advantages outweigh all this?
The answer is obvious. No drivers. After the nightmares of negotiating over the NIF, why ever build a passenger heavy rail track for a non-Metro line ever again.
agreed and they could have also used the second harbour crossing as a line suitable for double deckers plus a new northern beaches line.
@@blue-pi2kt no drivers = more savings = more money = fund more bullshit projects
no drivers = more savings = more money = more fundable bullshit projects
they also screwed up with the metro between parramatta and sydney cbd. they said it would remove trains from the congested mainline, when actually, it just adds another line taking a new route. the other lines will still have to go via the mainline and it will still be congested
The worst PR fail is they never explained to the public, it will take the Bankstown line off the city circle. Commuters are frustrated at network delays, full trains and they want the government to fix it and not build a pointless metro. Ask any commuters, they won't know the metro does exactly this, frees up the city circle to add more trains across the network, reduces line interdependency and prevents the whole network grinding to a halt. Government PR keeps focusing on aesthetics of the metro trains and stations, very out of touch with the people.
One of the important reasons for converting the Bankstown Line to Metro was to reduce passenger numbers at Town Hall and Wynard stations. Cancelling the Metro to Bankstown would only add more pressure to these already overcrowded stations. The reason the Metro didn't go to Hurstville is simple. The T4 line is shared between Sydney & NSW trains and is also a major heavy freight route. The existing rail corridor simply could not handle the extra rail traffic.
As history shows, the worse thing an incoming government can do is cancel a current infrastructure project. As stated, canceling this project would put in doubt the Metro project as a whole.... id be questioning who the "source" is. Is it someone trying to start a conversation to effect the upcoming election.
NSW Labor has no objections to the conversion and no plans to scrap it.
I’ve wondered why didn’t they just extend the Metro line up to Sydenham on dedicated platforms where commuters change trains at Sydenham (like they currently do at Chatswood) and leave the rest of the T3 line alone?
That was the simple solution, but neo-liberal ideology is determining what happens along T3 and the cost and inconvenience to the public is not a concern of the LNP.
Why cant they convert "existing Chatswood to Central train" to Metro instead of going under ground and cut Bankstown line in 3 sections ?
Very interesting mate. Rough old part of town down that way
I think it should be cancelled as no way will people will accept the fact that birrong and yagoona will lose access to trains. Especially after the upgrades to those stations.
The govt will lose all the Bankstown voters plus west of that. Alot of Vietnamese Bankstown community folk travel to Cabramatta and vice visa. This wont go without a fight from one of the biggest ethnic communities in Sydney. Thats for sure.
Having to change trains, and the lack of direct trains to a CBD is not a negative if those interchanges are convenient. The interchange at Bankstown is going to be super convenient.
The project also will mean that more trains will be able to use the City Circle from the Inner West and East Hills Line, so the benefits are network wide.
Compared to what is currently happening at Chatswood, it is a walk in the park.
Great great great video Sharath...the improvements just keep on coming, awesome stuff!!!
And yet again...we're faced with Government stupidity resulting in gross expenditure going to waste...and also the development side...hmmmm, I wonder how many Poli's have fingers in pies of developers and the like, and what they stand to gain from further development...an interesting thought indeed...because all our Politicians are good honest hard working people wanting nothing but the best for their constituents...aren't they??
Regardless of the outcome...I'm sure they could have come up with much better uses of the $$$$ elsewhere on the either the Metro development and expansion or the heavy rail network...than to dissect the Bankstown line as they're in the process of doing at present.
Another week and nearly another 1k subscribers added...I remember when it was just under 1k subscribers when I first found n subscribed...onwards and upwards still mate...great work!!!!
Worth looking at exactly which parties hold seats along the corridor. It's not beyond question that people who vote the wrong way get ratf**ked.
If you want to know what financial interests that politicians have, you can read their procunery interests declarations. If you suspect anything untoward, you can report them to ICAC.
honestly the metro shouldn’t be something that takes over already existing heavy rail corridors. it feels like a stupid idea to put so much money into converting the already existing line to metro, when they could instead be spending the money to build the metro to somewhere that isn’t serviced by any form of transport aside from busses. sure the Bankstown line was in need of station upgrades, but converting the whole thing to metro just as a way to reduce congestion feels like a bad decision. there are definitely better and more cost efficient ways to reduce congestion and i think that they should’ve just come up with a different idea completely.
i do however think the line from Chatswood to Sydnham is something that should still be complete as it does serve certain areas that don’t have direct rail access. they can then decide after the completion of that section as to whether they want to make sydnham the terminus of the metro, or extend it in a different direction to serve other areas not already serviced by rail.
i really just don’t think the Bankstown line conversion is needed, and they should instead just upgrade it to current heavy rail standards. that’s just my opinion though.
And you'll end up having to spend $billions more constructing a new city loop to provide the capacity that T2 and T8 desperately need
Drive me crazy how they seem to build stations in the middle of nowhere here in Brisbane. Need to use station-side land better.
that land is saved for future high rise devolpment when it is demanded
16:53 Nooooooo nonononononono!!!!! Please no! I just want trains that run more than every 15 mins, is that too much to ask for 😭😭😭 And it was going to be a direct line to friends living on the North Shore! If this gets cancelled, I'm going to be so upset, especially with all the disruption I've already had to put up with over the last couple of years living nearby one of the stations being converted 😭😭😭
Chill out. It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
@@user-kc1tf7zm3bAt what cost does it benefit those people? How much tax payer money has already been given and future guaranteed to leave our country ? (MTR 60% ownership) Who did the government promise contracts to develop those areas and who can afford to live in these new spaces? Does this not also affect passenger junction station traffic with higher volume boarding and alighting onto other Train services that further increase platform times on Sydney Train services. (City Circle connections for example) This will slow the network down as a whole as the City Circle is the heart of the network.
I believe those funds would have been better served to building a new network giving many current and future locations access to alternative transport apart from buses. Look no further than the fastest developing areas around the edge of the urban sprawl. It all comes back to bad planning with governments allowing housing developments before upgrading infrastructure and then are forced to do so after the fact.
@@azwanazmi1484 The new Sydney Metro City & Southwest for 2025 will most certainly be of benefit and amenity for those who live along its metro corridor. The time savings benefit is without question. This is especially the case for those who need to travel beyond the Harbour Bridge, and, into the North Shore as this yields a direct link to the north.
As for the economics, value and opportunity costs of the new metro line, these are another set of questions altogether. It is all way too late now to ask these questions, given the advanced state of the project’s construction.
But, it has to be said, for those who look forward to the new metro in a few years time, these passengers are eagerly looking forward to its eventual opening.
As a commuter on the T3, it’s definitely not a quiet line and it’s as packed as the other lines pre covid. What I do agree is that there is no requirement of a metro if they’d run more trains during peak hour.
So sick of this "quiet line" narrative. Guaranteed if they do the stats, they would find numbers more or less the same. Right now, people who uses the T3 are treated like second-class citizens compared to people who uses the T1. Blatant discrimination if you ask me.
I think there's really two options here:
1. Carry one with the Bankstown conversion, but be 110% clear that from day 1 it will be extended through Birrong to a new interchange at Regents Park - no BS shuttles.
2. Scrap the Bankstown conversion, and from Sydenham continue on a new subsurface alignment to the airport, and on to Botany and Malabar, where it can terminate together with an extension of the light rail south along Anzac parade.
Neither are ideal, but IMHO the Bankstown conversion was just a giant handout to developers, while a direct link to the airport from the Northwest is much more beneficial to ordinary people (and still provide some opportunities for regenerating Botany, which is pretty grim).
At the same time, Lidcombe-St Marys should be build as regular rail, not metro. it's much more flexible, and provides the option for running fast/express airport trains to Badgery's Creek directly from the CBD.
If you ignore all the corruption in the construction industry and it’s involvement in NSW Liberal Party, the answer remains elusive. For everyone else, the reason they chose to convert this line is obvious. Metro = no pesky unions. Metro actively excludes anyone with prior union involvement, and the government wants to hand as many public assets as possible over to private, FOR PROFIT, companies - its public transport infrastructure based purely on ideology.
another great video, but i think the blaming of the strikes is just typical propaganda you see in the media. the solution doesnt fix what they originally thought, and the spend doesnt make sense anymore.
Your insider is a muppet! As an accountant on this project I can assure you having worked in sydtrains operations fr 14 yrs the running costs of running empty 8 car double deck trains was extraordinary! Crewing costs alone were 34%. The inconvenience of maybe 10 people a day who catch trains to punchbowl from Liverpool is insignificant! Feel free to reach out if you want further breakdown. The congestion is not about people more so trains traversing onto inner West local mixed up with east hills trains. 1 or 2 late trains would throw the entire network out! The EH line can't be converted as it goes through airport.
The Sydney Metro terminating at Sydenham isn't all that bad tbh. It adds to the existing network without taking anything away or drastically altering what currently exists.
Making the Sydneham-Bankstown stations more accusable in the prosess is also a win.
With the congestion on the four tracks from Sydenham to Central it would be insane to terminate the metro there when you can convert one of the other lines across to metro and use those tracks. The line that is converted (in the current plan, the Bankstown line) gets faster and more frequent trips to the city, while the other lines benefit from the reduced congestion and so get additional paths and therefore more frequent services to the City. Converting any one line is a win for all lines. It would be a massive wasted opportunity to not send some of the services into the metro that are currently running through Sydenham bottleneck.
If you terminate the metro at Sydenham you’ll also need to terminate the Bankstown line at Sydenham to get the network wide benefits of removing the T3 from the Illawarra tracks and the city circle.
If you don’t remove the T3 from the city you’re removing about 20tph of benefits to the rest of the sydney trains network
I have never been able to understand why you would duplicate an already existing line line with Metro when so much of Sydney has no public transport. For many years I commuted between Burwood & Bankstown (via Regents Park) I don't see how that would be possible with the Metro
It's easy. Train 1 Burwood to Lidcombe, wait ~15 minutes, train 2 Lidcombe to Bankstown. Or Burwood-Redfern-Bankstown.
The people getting screwed are the ones going Campsie-Lidcombe-Paramatta or similar, who will be either changing 2-3 times or going via Redfern (almost always slower, sometimes much slower and if there are problems you're much more likely to be affected at Redfern). My commute means I'm better off on the bicycle to Strathfield then going west regardless of weather or time of day, and that's with the current nasty changes (express to Paramatta does not stop at Lidcombe). Adding a change at Bankstown will not improve that, even if the shuttle runs every ten minutes in sync with the Metro.
Simple. You either remove a line from the city circle or you add tracks to the city circle.
Removing the Bankstown line from the City Circle is monumentously cheaper than adding 2 tracks (or more) to the city circle.
@Peter Cowan Sydney Metro is owned by the NSW Government.
@Peter Cowan Privatisation of what exactly? High rise development - yes. The government has made no secret of it. The biggest problem in Australia is lack of affordable housing. That is not going to be achieved by the failed urban sprawl in outer Sydney.
yeah, just give the northern beaches a rail line for once, instead of giving bankstown this stupid metro
Great video and keep up the fantastic work 👍
If only someone could possibly have known that the line was 100 years old, with curved stations, before planning approval. If only someone could have physically inspected the infrastructure while designing and costing the project. Impossible, I know. Foolish of me to imagine it
If you know the history of the project they did - but it's a cost benefit analysis.
Straightening platforms can be done, but it's horrendously expensive - you need to alter the track corridoor - resuming houses (expensive, time consuming and political nightmare), shift roads and bridges cutting off vehicle traffic, and likely partially demolish some heritage station buildings.
And have substantial periods with no services so you can physically shift track.
The initial proposal had some bigger changes, but required a 6-12 month shutdown of the T3 line. The community objected to that and so they went with a proposal that required more minimal changes and shorter shutdowns..
While platform edge closures will be new to Sydney, it's proven rail technology in many cities overseas.
@@mark123655 did they use the same guys who commissioned rolling stock that couldn't manage the grade of the Lane Cove River section of track, or the guys who commissioned rolling stock too large for the tunnels, or the guys who commissioned light rail whose chassis cracked with a few months' use? Outstanding!
@@ColinMcCormack at least have your facts right. The cracked trams were delivered in 2013. The Blue mountains trains was a choice between altering 100yo tunnels to modern standards, or having to buy a train fleet that was different in dimensions to the rest of the network.
Plenty of tradeoffs in decision making
Honestly can't understand the inner city placement of the line. The waterloo station is in a bad spot, on Redferns backdoor. They should have either made the line further west at Sydney University, or further east, closer to the large double public housing towers are.
Cancelling the the Bankstown extension is shortsighted. The problems outlined will largely go away if they decide to extend it to Liverpool now, instead of waiting 20 years. Liverpool also needs some higher density development. I do not understand this only going half way mentality. Stopping at Sydenham is just silly. Public transport like Metro is expensive, but we need to invest in the future.
Just discovered your channel, nice work, subbed. From a fellow RUclipsr in Sydney who went full time Youtubing with 10k subs 11 years ago, so keep it up!
There are those like myself who do not support converting heavy rail corridors to a metro style rapid transit system, I am not against the metro concept, if its built in certain area's of Sydney to reduce traffic congestion, meaning it should have been built to the confines of the older parts of Sydney suburbia that was once serviced by the now long lost tram network, there are those who think that a metro should be built to the outer suburbs of the north & south west of Sydney, and it maybe an answer to reducing car usage in the short term, but in my opinion that is a mistake that most "transport planners" make these days, building a metro network for past/present day usage, forgetting about the distant future, where heavy rail maybe required, the present situation of conversion of the Bankstown line was a mistake, but too much money has been spent on it now to reverse that decision, what now needs to be considered where to direct the line after Bankstown, one option is split the path in two directions, one towards Liverpool over a new alignment, the other towards Lidcombe & continue to connect with the now planned Hunter St to Parramatta metro, I am also wondering why a metro has not be planned & started for the northern beaches.
No matter what type of new rail corridors, heavy or metro, it is far better than wasting taxpayers money on building more expensive roads that only encourage more people to drive to work, and also make them pay to use them.
A lot of local communities (between Liverpool and Bankstown) don't even want their trains to go to Bankstown - - says a lot about Bankstown... its council and so on and so forth 😂
A few things to mention in addition to this video......
1. The Metro are single deck cars, so carry fewer passengers.
2. Maybe there has been a decrease in the number of passengers yet look at where units are being built.
3. The number of new units being built in Bankstown lately has gone through the roof, no pun intended
4. The Metro has very limited seating, so 95% of passengers will be standing while traveling in either direction. You've had a long, hard day at work and now you have to stand on your way home? It is 5am and the train is busy and you are half asleep yet have to stand on your way to work, being half asleep?
5. Since the same tracks are being used, unlikely it will save time unless the stopping pattern changes which means fewer services for some stations, not more. The same speed restrictions will have to apply.
6. Does anyone really trust a train without a real human being at the front and a guard to ensure passenger safety?
7. the Libs made it illegal for the mainstream media to publish any negative news re the Metro going from Chatswood outwards so it would appear to be a good network. Appearance does not always equal reality or facts.
8. They say they have computers to detect if someone is in the corridor on the Bankstown line. Every Driver knows the issue regarding the Ibis birds on the Bankstown line and how dumb they are and get hit multiple times a day. Can you imagine the Metro's computer system stopping a train because it detects something in the corridor only for it to be a bird? Moving or eradicating the Ibis birds from their natural habitat could be an environmental disaster
9. There is no issue with trains from the Bankstown and Illawarra lines at Sydenham as they don't cross paths at all....Bankstown trains used to go on P1&2, Illawarra Trains on P5&6. Illawarra trains do not even go around City Circle....it is like an isolated line on its own.
These are just some points to consider and are from the top of my head.
Skip to 16:40 for the problem.
It's just history and bumfluff before this.
While other Metro lines are/will be good for Sydney, Metro Southwest is just there for the Liberal Party developer mates. Instead, they should build underground metro rail lines (w/ corresponding high rise apartment towers) from Edgecliff to Vaucluse and from North Sydney to Mosman. Perfect locations for it.
Great video! However, when trying understand why build the Metro rail extension out to Bankstown, you have to look at the politics of it (remember, the LNP will eventually privatise if it is completed). The LNP get the political kudos in their electoral base of NW Sydney, and deliver the big finger to SW Sydney residents from Marrickville to Bankstown with never ending transport disruption. It is the safe Labor seats that have to live through this disruption while safe LNP seats get what they need. The Bankstown extension is for privatisation purposes only, ie a bigger asset will make it easier to sell when the time comes. Again we see wealthier parts of Sydney getting what they need at the expense of poorer Sydney. Go look at state electoral distribution maps, the Red Rooster line and the actual proposed SW Metro line. Its pretty obvious....and guess who gets to pay for it all...we the taxpayers! And of course, in time there will be LNP politicians who retire to a highly paid directorship with the Metro Rail corporation....just like Nick Greiner has done with the toll road builders.
You haven't mentioned one particular motivation for conversion of an existing line to the new driverless technology: It takes a number of stations out of Sydney Trains management and puts them under Metro management. This is gold for a government that loves privatisation and doesn't like unionised drivers striking.
I've followed this project for years (since well before COVID), attended engineering and community presentations on it, etc. And it really is largely about pulling one line's worth of traffic off the City Circle, as far as I can tell. Why not a more popular line, then? The cynic in me says that if they do it with the least popular line, the potential number of whingers about having to change trains or having services disrupted for years for construction is lower. OK, then why not just create another parallel track through the city heavy-rail style rather than Metro style? See: privatisation, excuses for development uplift that there will be with more frequent service, etc.
Let's face it, the government likes the idea of automatic train operation as provided by Sydney Metro, as in theory it equates to lower manpower costs over the long term and virtually no lost time through industrial action. Had the plan been to connect Chatswood with Central or even Sydenham, then it made some sense (especially with an extension the other end to Schofields). Converting Sydenham to Bankstown to Metro never really made any sense whatsoever for many of the reasons set out in the video. It was just a way of enhancing the manpower and lost time benefits of Metro, at a pretty steep current cost.
Agree. The cost savings in not having drivers are more than outbalanced by the 50 or more Metro executives that have salaries greater than $300K. The whole metro project was ideologically driven from the get-go by Galdys and co when she was transport minister. Rail transport growth was and is needed, but the penny pinching in the specifications of the T2 metro tunnels & bridges to not be compatible with the existing suburban train fleet, is now costing the state $billions. And the conversion of Bankstown line to metro is all about selling real-estate, and getting punch drunk on stamp-duty so they can splurge money on things that are superficial, like replacing Penrith Football stadium
I do not understand the obsession with Metro style railways. As visitors we caught the Metro from Chatswood to not quite the end of line. While it was fast, it had curious acceleration and braking as does London's Dockland's driverless train. There is no rolling into a curve. It is either brake or accelerate to speed. The Metro was uncomfortable and quite rough. I think we left the Metro at Epping and travelled back to central Sydney by proper train in what felt like luxury travel. Smooth, quiet and in comfortable seats. But the trip was so slow. I've subsequently learnt that it was because of timetable padding. What is the need for Metro to the south west of Sydney? New tracks, better signalling, new stations and some untangling of trains junctions, normal trains can do the same as a Metro. Trains are fast, if they aren't hobbled and get a clear run.
I never thought this was a good idea to begin with. Logistically it would have made sense to not go to Sydenham and instead continue the underground metro corridor from Waterloo to Little Bay.
I agree, the limited resources should be channeled into new services into areas currently lacking a rail service of any type. More, wide spread public transport is needed, not this waste of money on needlessly replacing an existing and fully functional heavy rail with a Metro rail.
Surely they would have known about the conversion challenges like old stations when creating the initial business case...
Speculation and rumour is just that. There is constant assessment across projects like this for many reasons. There is nothing to suggest this project will not follow through until completion. I watch a lot of these videos as I do find them interesting and I respect the effort put in as I'm always curious about the history of my city, but to suggest a project might be shutting down with absolutely no backup or evidence does nothing but to worry and scare people.
It is total fantasy to think that an incoming Labor government would ever think to cancel the Southwest Metro, especially considering this far more efficient mode of transport directly benefits their local, state and federal Labor seats constituents.
I will say as a former resident in Sydney, i grew up in Rockdale on the T4 Illawarra and Eastern Suburbs line. If the Metro was planned to Hurstville. It would be better than Bankstown. The only downside would be at peak times as some T8 services run via Sydenham rather than Wolli Creek and they share tracks with the T3 Bankstown line from the City Circle to Sydenham. It would be a nuisance for the T8 via Sydenham as there are no connections from the T4 tracks at Wolli Creek to the tracks that connect to Turrella.
Also, if Metro was to run down to Hurstville. It would be a big benefit. I was down in Sydney not long ago. It's a pain that if you we're heading inbound towards the CBD in the evening. You would be stuck on all-stoppers if you lived between Allawah and Arncliffe especially in evening times. The Metro would solve that as the T4 heading outbound frequency is between Hurstville, Cronulla and Waterfall. Services to Cronulla and Waterfall would be shared as some services do Hurstville via Banksia or Wolli Creek. Cronulla and Waterfall usually at evening go via Hurstville.
So, if in summary if Metro was to go down via Hurstville. It would take over most services on the T4 to Hurstville and T4 Services will focus usually on Cronulla and Waterfall usually limited or express services. Also, some services whether City or Outbound would have delays of Hurstville, City and Illawarra services merging at Wolli Creek the Metro would solve.
What is so special about Punchbowl to Liverpool? It is only half hour service between Liverpool the city via Bankstown even at peak hour. Most trains and passengers go via Lidcombe. What about that original choice of Bankstown or Hurstville. For someone who doesn't think people should change trains how about all those people heading to south of Hurstville, a much busier station than Bankstown? As for the project being cancelled I expect Labor to cancel all Coalition projects, road, rail everything. That is because politics is so tribal Labor will not want to open any project started by their predecessors. The narrative will be the Coalition did nothing in 12 years. It is only public money being wasted.
Informative and we'll made video. I miss living in Sydney, so I subscribed.
Cancellation and restoration of the full rail line, the existing corridor could be upgraded to increase speed and reliability for far less then the metro conversion.
I Love The Concept Of The Southwest Metro And It Will Bring That Line Back To Life So I Really Want The Southwest Metro To Be Built
I Loved The Video Also Sharath
Completely agree! If you're keen to help make sure the South West Metro get built, would love your support signing the petition below (youtube doesn't allow links so you just need to replace the word DOT with actual full stops. Thank you!
savemetro DOT good DOT do/sydney
Imagine converting part of the T8 line into a Metro, from Revesby to all stops until Green Square and eventually a tunnel to Central.
I think they should have kept the existing train line and built an additional metro line beneath the existing train line. Inevitably the population will grow in these areas and it's ideal to have two lines to alleviate congestion. Great video :) 😃🚅
agreed or they could have taken a leaf out of Melbourne's book and rebuilt elevated.
Incredibly expensive
Connect the Bankstown Metro to Sydney Olympic Park and the West Metro. Then convert the T5 from Leppington through Liverpool to Parramatta. It does several things. Connects the Western Sydney airport to Liverpool and Parramatta. Connects the Canterbury Bankstown supports to their home ground. Connects WSA to the city via Metro. The list goes on.
congrats on trending :-) my only hopes with our public transport is for the T4 to finally get the same trains as everyone else,,, i want working air-conditioning and movable seats -_-‘ i sure hope all this turns out okay.
As someone who has used the Bankstown line regularly for many years, there really isn’t any problem that the metro needs to solve. Adding the metro would have slight improvements like faster and more frequent services, but neither of those was ever really an issue, especially not one that needs to be solved with this much disruption to the line in the interim.
A (the?) new government would take great pleasure and probably win support from the rest of the state by cancelling this wasteful project and terminating the metro at Sydenham which could then be developed as more of a centre.
Hi Sharath, I also have another concern for the Sydney Metro Southwest that you really don't have to answer, but can if you a want to.
If they'll convert old houses into highrises, it has a high possibility of investors coming in.
It sounds pretty good? Well, an already struggling rental market will be more expensive, causing in many people kicked out of their affordable houses, and being prompted to rent these expensive highrises.
From all this, Australia could have a very big homeless problem, similar to The United States.
What is your opinion?
(please pray they can still make more cheap apartments... )
I agree. Removing say 100 homes from the market in an area removes 100 potential families needing a home. Currently ALL apartments are not family friendly. Excessive strata fees, bad quality, lack of off-street car parking spaces. People hate them. All it does is increase the value of the remaining homes.
The reality is the government care a lot more about lining thr pockets of their developer mates and family members than looking after you and I.
Houses are not affordable in Sydney. Apartments are cheaper.
@@josephj6521 All apartments are not family friendly? New York would like a word..
It would have made more sense to go to atleast Sefton or Regents Park. At Sefton or Regents Park they could have just rebuilt a new station that handle Sydney Metro as well as Sydney Trains by more of less building a new station right beside the curent station.
Mate if you’ve tried a daily commute on the Bankstown line, you would know that it is far from fully well functioning.
Unless you live at one of the express stops, everyone else has to put up with trains every 15 minutes in PEAK time.
I hope Bankstown Metro completes. It will bring convenience to people and more reliable for many years to come.
Nothing makes sense till a project is fully complete. This an ongoing 100 year job to build and complete all sections of the metro. It will be brilliant and is a project mostly for future generations. Until then it will be bits here and bits there without them being fully linked.
maybe they could have designed it were the Metro stopped at all the stations to Bankstown, whilst the T3 could have run Express.
I agree that stations should be become destinations in their own right. Glad to hear you say it.
HAPPY AUSTRALIA DAY
WOOOOOOO HELL YEAH
Straya!
A solution to the congestion would be to run double deckers from Bondi Junction through the city to Redfern then express to Sydenham and one branch express to Hurstville then to Cronulla and Waterfall, and another branch express to Revesby and then to Macarther and Leppington (and WS airport). The city circle would then provide high frequency single deckers all stops to Hurstville, Revesby, the Inner West line and poss. Epping and Liverpool.
Speculation = garbage. There is no way the project will be cancelled and if Labor get in and do that they will be a 1 term government.