What is Metro Rail? Why is it a better option for Sydney than Heavy Rail? What is the difference?
Metro Rail has operated in London since 10 January 1863. In comparison, Sydney has had a Railway in New South Wales since 26 September 1855.
Metro Rail does not require a driver to operate the train. Metro rail is said to be faster than Heavy Rail. Japan has had its world famous ‘bullet’ train in operation for many decades and travels at speeds of 300 Km/Hr. This is a Heavy Rail train.
Metro Rail uses single deck carriages and with minimal seating. Sydney operated with single deck Tuscan red carriages for over sixty years. They were affectionately known as ‘red rattlers’.
The official policy is to use Double deck carriages. ISPUT supports the reintroduction of modern single deck carriages that would be used in off peak and on weekends.
If Metro Rail is a better option for Sydney, why didn’t Dr. J.J. Bradfield construct Metro Rail in the 1920s?
If Metro Rail is a better option for Sydney, how will it cope with our varying topography? Heavy Rail carriages can climb steep gradients. Can Metro do a better job for Sydney? Railway carriages are built more heavily than Metro Rail carriages and Light Rail Vehicles.
The London ‘Tube’ covers an area equivalent from the Sydney CBD to Strathfield. Also cities such as Adelaide, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and London have only one river throughout their Metropolitan areas. Sydney has numerous rivers that make our city the envy of the world. This issue alone has always been a challenge to our Transport planners.
Australia has a population of approximately 21 million people. London has nearly half that in Central London. Metro Rail is a mass transit system and that requires a population base which Sydney does not have. So why can’t we expand the Railways?
Metro Rail in London is separate to that of British Railway operations. Metro Rail proposed for Sydney is also as a separate network. Metro Rail would be operated privately. That would not mean that passengers pay the same fares as the existing Railways.
Passengers also like to complete the same journey on the one mode of transport. This is something that IMSARR Spokesperson, Victor Taffa learnt as a Sydney Taxi Driver.
Metro Rail is designed as a Branch line operation. Branch lines are far more restrictive in their operational capacity than through lines. How would Sydney cope if the City circle line had not been completed in 1956 and the East Hills line was still a Branch Railway?
Had the Carlingford line been upgraded and extended to Epping to thus complete the Parramatta to Chatswood line, Western line trains could be have been diverted onto the new line. This would have meant an increase in the capacity of the Western line and NO reduction of services on the Northern line between Eastwood and Strathfield.
Metro Rail is supposed to ‘ease rail congestion on parts of the City Rail network’ according to some people. How will this occur if no new Railway lines are built and patronage continues to increase on the City Rail network?
Metro Rail lines to Rozelle or Epping are not a solution to the problem. Expansion of the existing Railways will go much further to solving the problems that we face. Any other modes of transport be it Metro, Light Rail or Bus Transitways should complement the Rail network and not compete with the Rail network. As they used to say the “Trams used to meet the Trains.”
Branch Metro lines might meet the demands of today and capacity is able to handle needs over five years but how will a branch line cope in twenty years when demand has outstripped capacity and there is no ability or intention to extend a branch line. Sydney already has some Branch Railways, as does country New South Wales and also suburban Melbourne. Only a through line that connects into the existing network is a serious proposition.
Metro trains do not require a driver and yet jet aeroplanes require a pilot. If aeroplanes did not require a pilot, how would the plane that flew into New York’s Hudson River have gone without a pilot?
IMSARR Spokesperson Victor Taffa like many other commuters “just would not feel safe in a train being driven without a driver.”
Sydney has had a driver and a guard to manage the operations of a train and passenger safety since 1855. Why should we start now?
IMSARR would like to know why we need fifteen storey blocks of units in overcrowded suburbs simply to justify constructing anything other than a new road. What is wrong with expanding the existing Railways? Sydney will continue to grow. Can’t new Railway lines be added to the existing system? Why does it have to be Metro rail and if we can have special legislation introduced for Metro rail why haven’t State Governments given our existing Railways that same legislation?
IMSARR would like to know why the existing Railway lines cannot be extended.
IMSARR would like to know why we need Metro Rail at all. Are the Labor and Liberal Parties receiving donations from companies in the likely event that they will end up operating the Metro line?
IMSARR does not support Metro Rail at the expense of upgrading and expanding our Railways.
IMSARR does not support the impersonal nature of Metro Rail.
IMSARR supports Drivers and guards operating trains and station staff looking after the passengers. That is how it has been since 1855. As the advertisement says “when you’re on a good thing stick to it.”
|
|
|
