Sydney Metro is Great, But... 

I don’t think the idea of succession makes sense when it comes to modern transit modes - but it does feel like it’s serving the same role!

Sydney Trains and Sydney Metro are equally important and integral parts of Sydney's heavy rail network. Metro is not a successor to Trains, it is at this stage a complement. Neither will work without the other. Unlike other cities, our Train network is not restricted to outer suburban once an hour service, or 4 services a day. It's used the same way as a metro in terms of frequency and service in some areas, particularly the Inner West, and the Illawara Line. Heck even the T1 with great frequency at many stations. Understanding this, and understanding the way our heavy rail network works is important to understand the bigger picture. Sydney Metro West interchanges with the T1 at Westmead, T9 at North Strathfield, and T4 and M1 at Martin Place. Metro North West interchanges with the T9 at Epping, T1 and T9 at Chatswood, the T4 and soon to be Metro West at Martin Place, all lines at Central, and the T8 and T4 at Sydenham. The Metro is very well connected with plenty of interchanges. Metro in Parramatta connects with Light Rail, at Hunter Street and Central it also connects with Light Rail, at Barangaroo it provides easy access to ferries. Even at SOP it connects with future Light Rail. One of Reece's main points was the lack of platform to platform interchange at Hunter Street. Whilst I agree that better interchanges would have been great, it's not to say there are NONE. There seems to be some misplaced criticisms of Sydney Metro in the comments.

@@Koochoo thanks for your comment and insights. Just wanted to point out one minor typo you made, where you said that other cities are restricted to outer suburban once an hour service or 4 services a day. Pretty much every Australian capital city has train service which runs at least every 15 min minutes, often 10 or less, similar to an S bahn. It'll reach 3 minutes in some corridors in a few years in Perth.

@@illiiilli24601 Oh of course. I should have said outside Australia. Our heavy rail non-'metro' services in most of our cities here are the frequent reliable services that are distinct to what is considered regional rail in North America.

I’m from Sydney. It probably eventually will. Already it has taken over and split a rail line, Bankstown line, terminating at Bankstown where people change for further travel. The station will look great

Yeap he doesn't understand with the previous government. it's about squeezing money out of people

But what was behind that? Anything to do with industrial relations? That's the only reason I can think of...a conservative govt not wanting union contagion.

Metro Main line to scholfields train station or the other station was meant to happen If they got re elected Guess what happened.. Didn't get elected Was put off for years until now 😮 😂 😢😢😢 There is some article i read that stated this. If we get back in blah blah..etc lol

Somehow all Australian train projects are just based on political values

​@@Xavier_Citybecause major public works are always political in a democracy. There might be many benefits to cooperation but there are also always going to be conflicts of interest when it comes down to the finer details. Unless the projects are dictated by the federal government (which usually involves paying everybody off so they don't complain) you're going to have to cater to various interests if you want the projects to go ahead.

Well it sadly seems like Sydney trains expansion plans are basically nonexistent

Pffft. More like Sharathfield cause that guys a major train interchange.

@@RMTransit it seemed that way for a while before all of the Metro plans got drafted too, so I'm optimistic it's not the end of expansion. That said, I agree the pace is laggard compared to the city's needs.

Same! I love his channel. But yeah, some of the decisions that have been made on Sydney metro make me want to cry. I really think the SWMETROCITYSOUTHWESTAIRPORTTHINGY line really should be built as a regular heavy rail line, so people could have a one seat journey from the CBD to Badgery's Creek, and link it to the end of the Leppington branch, as well as continuing down to Narellan and Macarthur. That way you could get direct services to the airport from the CBD, the Blue Mountains and the SW. The choice of 25kv ac for random lines makes absolutely no sense to me at all, I must admit. Didn't even know that was something being considered, and it makes my brain hurt as to why on Earth they'd do this.

I love Sharath’s channel - almost as much as Reece! 😊 They’re a good combo.

The real shame is that the Liberals didn't "close the loop" properly and petered-out their SydneyMetro line 3km short of actually connecting to the main western line, near or at Schofields Station, which probably should have been rebuilt to be similar to Wolli Creek Station, with the two lines crossing under/over each other at virtual right-angles.

@@dj1NM3 I believe that's part of the overall Metro plan - an extension from St Marys to Tallawong via Schofields - with the difference in the power voltage and train sizes, I would expect a separated platform interface at Tallawong.

@@theaussiebackflipboy It doesn't seem like a very good plan at all, if there isn't even a single "standard SydneyMetro train" which can (if circumstances arise, such as multiple breakdowns, like all the rolling stock on the Inner West Lightrail dangerously cracking-up) traverse from one end of the SydneyMetro lines to the other (to take up the slack) without being pathetically forced into using rail replacement buses, rather than simply re-routing SydneyMetro trains from one line to another.

@@dj1NM3Wolli Creek station sucks. Apart from the interchange, there's only two platforms on the T4 line which means if there's trackwork on that running line there's no access to the station, whilst all the other stations along that stretch have four platforms.

@@JamesTK There wouldn't be much other choice except build a similar to Wolli Creek station, unless a few KM of the SydneyMetro was ripped up and a big curve either east of west rebuilt to make in come in parallel with the main western line, but that seems a bit unrealistic.

Agree. I don’t think this video really accounted for the nuances of Sydney, that the Metro is a complement to the Sydney Trains network (not something totally different), and that the incompatibility between the two lines isn’t necessarily a showstopper.

Agree, although I dont think it's sensible to refer to the T8 going through Wynyard as once Metro 1 opens and the Bankstown line moves out of the City Circle, there will only be the one line travelling through the Circle (T2-T8 will merge). Unsure how this will be referred to on the official network map and materials though.

As a person who lived at the end of a Melbourne train line, in a comparable area to Kellyville (Belgrave). Having parking (lots) is essential. People out that way aren’t going to trek half n hour on bad footpaths to the train station and there isn’t really buses like that too. My train station had a small amount of parking and it would overflow everyday out onto the street.

@@kazpaapzak8637 Belgrave isn't comparable to Kellyville in my opinion, Belgrave is more comparable to Richmond, or even Berowra or Waterfall except for the fact that the Main North and the Illawarra rail lines continue beyond those two stations respectively.

@@kazpaapzak8637 I think the point they were making was to create those bus networks, because I agree that walking in areas like Kellyville isn't really feasible. Parking at the NW metro stations is relatively good compared to older stations in similar areas but a few decades from now when density is increased those 1200 spots will be pretty irrelevant.

Exactly. Tho I thought future extension east was also a consideration, but sounds like I assumed incorrectly. There's a lot of stuff underground around there - I heard there's like centimetres between the tunnels and some existing infrastructure, and not very many cm either!

But then I’d suggest moving to interchange at a different site where better connections could be made. I think a good metro metro connection should probably a priority over trains metro connections.

@@peterhoz It is a consideration and still is. They're building stub tunnels for that.

@@RMTransit Any connections are better than none - and given that Wynyard sees a high volume of trains at high frequencies from multiple lines, that undergound connection (even if requiring to tap on and off) is still important. However for the design of Metro West, to ensure a station at Pyrmont (which is one of the most densely populated places in Australia) then a station in the northern CBD was needed. As Ricoboy also pointed out, the station and lines had to fit around existing tunnels of Metro and Trains, and building foundations and basements etc. Having the Hunter Street Station be somewhere else may have meant no Pyrmont Station, or potentially far worse outcomes in other areas. The approved plan allows for a super hub at Martin Place as well as connections to Wynyard and Light Rail on George Street. I think it's a good result even if it may not be ideal.

Large scale events and possible overcrowding may be why they decided against cross platform transfers at Hunter St. Sydney Harbour has throughout the year big events Australia Day, NYE, Vivid, where many hundred of thousands gather around the Circular Quay and there is desire for more. With these events they often need to close selected stations to prevent overcrowding. Like Bank tube station in London, walking a block to interchange can help with crowd management. Similarly with office workers, shops can help spread out the peak hour crush.

Yep, and unfortunately when the new state government came into power they couldn't do anything to fix it.

Thanks for watching, puzzling indeed!

@@JayJayGamerOfficial The new state government cut plans for building even more metro lines :\ they're not off to a good start.

@@Flare03l i mean do you blame them? The suburban rail network was neglected for a decade or so and the state is in a record amount of debt with shortages with healthcare and schools especially

@@JayJayGamerOfficial To be fair, the new state government opposed new lines being built in my area saying it’d be expensive, and still don’t want to build the new lines down South which need more and new public transport, but I’m very thankful the Tallawong-Epping-Chatswood metro was built and being extended to CBD when there has historically been no good public transport from the Hills to the other Northern suburbs let alone the city. And it’s a huge upgrade in terms of experience, safety, and reliability compared to Sydney trains plus buses. I think all gov’ts should be ambitious in spending for the future like the NSW Libs under O’Farrell, Baird, Gladys, Perrottet, and like previous Labor governments such as Hawke, Keating, Rudd. I hope as inflation wears off Labor will continue to invest in finishing the Metro whilst we’re building the rest, rather than simply cancel them and rush to build newer, more incompatible versions 30 years later when people demand it.

Incompatibility is a recurring theme in Australia

@@KanishQQuotes Indeed. In fact, the last line to be converted to the standard Australian gauge was only finished in 2004.

I don’t think it’s something that users need to worry a lot about - it’s a planning problem!

@@RMTransit But the users will be inconvenienced by the bad planning!

​@@speculationsperceivedstandard standard gauge? Or cape gauge?

Hey sorry about your uncle

And a very nice field it was too - with charming village attached - bit of a pigs ear now in my opinion

@@Coolwow437 bro cant read

@@shadoww7301 shut your mouth mate

yeah, isn't high density living just great. People up your fundamental orifice, basic shelter costing you and arm and leg, some space of your, just a thing of the past. Oh, yes! bring on the glorious future!

Or parked up rolling stock banned by the unions for safety?

@@Low760 Oh! I'd forgotten about that!

Unionized workers frequently operate and maintain automated train systems, so they aren’t some silver bullet of Union busting. Worth looking into such cases in London and Paris!

@@RMTransit This is true. The truth is going to be more complex than I know, but the only thing I can add is that it was always only one particular union who were in the news.

Didn't intend to point the finger at any rail union, BTW. Some of the big technology decisions have criticised by the media, too. Generally the response has been something like "that's what we think best" with not great attempts at explaining why.

They manage to do it in a number of locations in London, I think we should be able to do it in Sydney. So far we have tried nothing and it didn't work

@@crazycomet8635 London has a much easier geography than Sydney. I think they genuinely don't have enough space to do it.

@@crazycomet8635 you need to look at an underground map of the Sydney CBD to really understand why we can’t do it. The amount of tunnels down there is immense.

Would have been even better if the tunnels to Macquarie had been built properly and not had to have ridiculous curves to avoid building a bridge over the Lane Cove River. That adds several minutes to the journey.

@@kyletopfer7818 I'd happily give that extra few minutes for a smoother ride. Imagine going down the valley on the Metro as you would on Delhi road, jeez.

Dude I live in Melbourne but when I saw chatswood from this video I like almost cried at how much better the whole area looks compared to here

you must love how the chinese have taken over, then?

What does Melbourne have to do with anything?

It confuses me why the metro west skips so many suburbs like i get that it’s meant to be fast and only for people getting to those suburbs but it just skips so many..

It’s an interesting project, the capacity seems like it’s probably needed long term!

Is this actually getting built or is it more in the proposal stages?

@@Infernus25 it has been in the proposal stages for quite a while. Malmö actively plans for it and even has a project website for it. Just recently Copenhagen finalized the plans for its M5 line, scheduled to start construction in 2024 and opening in 2035. This is the line that may be extended to Malmö in the future. Both cities look very favorable at the extension, but there is no financing yet. The Danish government wants Sweden to shoulder the cost of an extension. And Malmö is not allowed to finance an extension via loans themselves without the approval of the Swedish parliament. Traditionally, Sweden has never prioritized infrastructure in or around Malmö, so it's really up in the air. The plans are very cool though. And train capacity for travel between Malmö and Copenhagen is already starting to become an issue.

@@xyzxyzxyzxyzxyzxyz oh cool, it would be very neat, when I visited the existing trains were already great but as you said the capacity was an issue. I just don't see it being the smartest use of funds though tbh as tunneling all that way would cost billions, surely more frequent service should be suggested first

@@Infernus25 the problem is that the actual capacity on the tracks are limited. Plus, a metro connection would result in around 20 minutes from Central Station to central station, where it is 40 minutes today. Multiple alternatives to alleviate capacity is being considered though. One option is another fixed rail link from Landskrona to Copenhagen (especially for cargo traffic, but also for traffic from Helsingborg and further north) or from Helsingborg to Helsingør. Also, capacity on the bus network in Malmö is severely strained as it is, despite double articulated express buses, bus priority signaling and bus only roads. So Malmö could benefit from a metro and it would make sense if the two cities could share maintenance and facilities. But yeah, cost of that tunnel is an issue. Though, TBM has been a surprisingly cheap and fast option before in Malmö. When they built a train tunnel through Malmö 20 years ago, the project was finished a year before schedule and massively under budget.

It's because of.. the liberal party.

I think it’s fair to say the chance of that is 0, I do not think the infrastructure is being built to support HSR

@@Low760 Yeah, politics.

It would have been better to convert the existing infrastructure for the original metro line to 25kV. Nevertheless I don't have a problem with stand-alone systems. The use cases where you might actually need to swap trains between metro lines are either rare or contrived.

​​@@Low760As opposed to the Labor party who couldn't even build a metro in their 14 years in office and were still opposed to the whole system up until the election. But yeah, blame the Liberal party for building the whole network we have now from the ground up

An elaborate union bust

Yep, unfortunately those union issues are only happening because the previous government tried taking too many shortcuts not only on the new intercity trains but on everyday service too

An example of lack of compatibility not working is when the entire fleet of Sydney L1 had to be grounded and the fleet from L2/L3 were not certified for L1.

I’m planning to do so, eventually!

The NSW Liberals may have been corrupt but they implemented a lot of much needed infrastructure changes, Labor just does the typical Labor thing, cancels everything, stops any future projects and wastes money on rubbish by letting the unions make all the decisions, so we will now stay in Labor stagnate for however long they are in charge of NSW.

it’s a good thing metro is getting scraped! Think about how many jobs losses would occur from the continuation of sydney metro. I support extending sydney train network instead!

Its not if you know the Victoria line at rush hour. The additional space was needed!

“Amazing city” lol

Or it was a technical decision to join the 21st century. It had zero to do with the NSW Treasury

That’s fine, but it feels strange to build a new subnetwork - Sydney metro in this case, and not have the lines seamlessly interconnect

@@RMTransit the other thing about hunter street station was so that they could extend the metro further east in the future rather than forcing it south. but dont get me wrong they still could have combined the stations in a grade-separated + which would have been better.

@@RMTransitNot when it comes with so many downsides. It’s not a cost thing at all, it’s about maximising benefits.

​@@RMTransitHunter St connects to two different stations, so while not perfect it is massively improving connections. I also don't think there will be a massive number of transfers. For the majority the CBD will be the destination and the transfer will be to the surface to either walk or take the light rail.

​@@RMTransit Pretty much every fault you describe here is down to politics and old errors. The first line was built as it was because it was already part ordered and designed as a heavy rail line (which as you said, would have made more sense). The driverless train structure is down to weakening the union, as is the private partnership. The interchange question is really part of allowing poor interchange with both the other line and the heavy rail network. Poor interchange, deliberately? Yes. In fact they are repeating the biggest mistake in Sydney's rail transport system, forcing everything through the "centre" which is on the coast, and they are concerned about capacity at the real city stations, so making it hard in the city, but easier at "Central" station, means that people changing from metro to heavy rail will do so there. Power? Well, the orders were already in for power when they decided to switch the North West line to "metro" so they used that. The lengths of existing line being converted on the line to Bankstown, at least, were already powered so why change that? But the Liberal government, when it knew it was outgoing, ordered a different power system for the western Sydney Airoport outlier specifically so it would cost too much for the incoming Labor government to change it back to heavy rail. So everyone going to Western Sydney Airport will have to change onto the metro at St Mary's. I just don't see that being at all popular, especially in summer. And should anyone ever build the next planned stage to link the western section to the North West line, people will have to change from Metro to Metro. Genius! Meanwhile the key issues in Sydney, lines that don't go through the "central" CBD, and obvious sections for Metro line to the Northern Beaches and Brighton, are ignored, and the T4 heavy line will never make it to Bondi, and so on. As for housing around the lines? In Chatswood it appears to be working out somewhat. But the only people who can afford to move into the expensive new apartments that are happening on the North West line (and some heavy rail stations) are traditional and richer residents: hence they expect to be able to drive everywhere (this is Sydney): and because the trains only go through the CBD, many of them are stuck between bad car commutes, crowded buses (some rerouted to only run to local metro stations!) or travelling tens of unnecessary kilometres to the coast and back. Hence a demand for... roads! Don't forget also that all this rail has cost money, and that money seems not to be there. The last government created a special entity to hide the debt, and that particular chicken is coming home to roost for the new government. So it's pretty much all explicable by looking widely enough, and I presume politics are outside your purview, at least.

While true for a single route, you can't actually have that network wide.

Not should you want to

@@jan-lukasYes, it is situational. Fair clarification.

I think it's because platform screen doors are almost a must in newly built systems

I’ve never seen someone that loves platform screen doors so much. Meanwhile in the US just having trains is a big accomplishment.

He mentioned them right at the very end

Name a better duo

Train every 30 sec is 120tph did u time the train from when it enters the platform to when the last carriageleaves the platform ir just the dwell time ?

Nah double level EMUs and loco hauled are common in Europe, Americans have lots of double level loco hauled sets and I believe EMUs in Chicago, and caltrain are even upgrading to Swiss double level multiple units

You're not wrong. I used to work at Macquarie Park and when I got off the Metro, I literally had to walk 25 mins just to get to work. The placing of the station is abysmal.

Suburban rail connection to the airport will probably be canceled.

So what? What has Melbourne got to do with anything? Never heard of any of the suburbs you mention anyway.

That means there is not enough density surrounding the station, or not enough stations.

If they want higher densities they’d better build more terraces or apartments with at least 4 bedrooms fit for families. Having 95% of 1&2 bedroom apartments and a few penthouse 3 bedrooms is a waste.

A salient point is that busses stop running, often long before trains stop running. As a lapsed suburbanite my option when working late shift would not be taking the train and then catching the non existent bus, it would be driving my car to work and driving home. Having the option to park near the station means I only have to take the car to work if I work after the trains are shut down. For work read socialise or shop or live life in general. I do have friends who live within walking distance of stations and it is awesome, but that is not how most of Sydney was built out once the car appeared.

Thanks for this. I get Reece’s general apprehension towards Park N Rides, especially when they’re built with no consideration for the future, but in general having some space for them is a good thing on the outer fringes of the city. Chatswood not having a large Park N Ride makes sense because it was already a developed area when Metro was built, as trains have been serving it for something like nearly 100 years. It also has very frequent bus service. Development of a new area doesn’t happen overnight, so using the space around the station for something purposeful in the meantime isn’t a bad thing.

You have to do it smart. Set up the car parks in little blocks that you can gradually replace with proper buildings over time, the amount of money you have to spend demolishing a surface lot to put up a building is small compared to the cost of demolishing a multi-story parking garage. You just have to plan ahead by making sure that there's infrastructure right of way for all the buildings you eventually want to build.

@@francesconicoletti2547 that's really shocking to read. My experience in Europe is that buses continue running even after trains stop running, although with reduced service at those late hours. And in most medium sized cities and capitals there are at least some night buses even if metro/trains don't run during the night. I'm guessing that was Reece's point of view too, sad it's different in Australia!

Even Perth had an episode 😂 im rooting for an Adelaide story as well

25kV AC work better if in open spaces, in tunnel requires a lot of additional electric insulation for higher tension. 1500 V DC is a "standard" overhead metro electrification, 25 kV AC is not.

@@d1234as That makes perfectly sense. I can add to that: The only time you ever see use in a tunnel system is if it's part of the national mainlines. The S-Bahn tunnels of various German cities are 15000V AC because the national railway network, which they also drive on, is electrified with these voltages as well. There also is the fact that lower voltages also favour smaller systems as the comparative amount of substations which needs to be built is lower than over larger distances.

I was in chatswood recently from Perth and was shocked that there was hardly any Aussies..wtf at least Perth still feels Australian 🇦🇺

@@ACDZ123 ok go back to Perth

@@phunk8607 It's a troll, with a 3 month old RU-vid channel.

The RER is part 25kv because the railways in the north half of France are 25kv AC. (South being the older 1500vDC system) The RER trains under whatever is there. For the Sydney Metro it makes no sense at all. They are doing this to ensure total incompatibility. The airport line in particular is so short that it won't be long enough for phase breaks to balance the 3 phase load on the transmission network. so I assume the substation (with 25kv AC they probably will only need one) will be a frequency converter system - taking 3-phase AC from the transmission network, converting it to a short HV 'DC link' and then into a single phase converter to get the 25kv AV for the overhead. Then the train takes that, transforms it down, and rectifies to DC for a 'DC link' to the traction converters which will convert it back to 3-phase AC variable frequency for the motors. Wouldn't it be simpler overall for such a short line, running short trains to use DC overhead and remove two conversion steps?

@BB-xx3dv Yes. This 'DC Link' may be as short as a couple of bus bars to take the DC from one converter cabinet to the next one. AC transmission isn't more efficient, it is just easy to transform the voltage up or down. It is high voltage transmission is more efficient. Now that high-power, high-efficiency solid-state converters exist, some long transmission lines are now DC not AC. The problem with AC railways is it's a single phase not 3, so somehow you have to balance the load across the 3 phases of the public transmission network. Usually, this is done over a large area by having 'phase breaks'. The railway is divided up into sections and fed from a different phase with the hope that over the wider area, the load is balanced.

@@MatthewGeier Thats how Thameslink also works. North half is 25kv AC Overhead wires and the south half is 750 volts DC third rail.

He already made one