It's acceptable that the new metro line will use 3-car trains as the Downtown Line on the Singapore MRT runs 3-car trains, yet had a ridership of 250,000. Also, since the new metro line runs through currently very underdeveloped areas, it isn't entirely necessary for longer trains. However, if there was a fourth luggage car (seen in Hong Kong) that would free up space on the train for seats which would be otherwise blocked by suitcases.
I would say a luggage car on that line is a bit redundant as most people would be changing to the T1 (& possibly the Blue Mt Line) at St. Mary's for further travel.
seems metro west will run on 25kV AC power, while the other metro network runs on 1.5kV DC. even if you wanted train interchangeability, power supply is going to be a problem.
Metro west and WSI metro are both 25 kV ac. Thats the modern standard and used in places like Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide. 1500 v dc is early 20th century stuff and more expensive. We should be upgrading to that standard whenever and wherever possible. Albeit that’s not simple in such an entangled system of lines like Sydney Trains. The initial metro is probably 1500 v dc because of its close proximity to other Sydney Trains. BTW India converted its old systems to 25 kV ac years ago. If you want long distance VFTs in the future the 25 kV ac system is very much the choice. Metros are designed best using separate unentangled lines with exchanges (cross platform where the geography allows it) where needed. I suspect you will see one at or around the SW Link and at or around Schofields in the future.
@@tacitdionysus3220 Fair enough. I live in Paris, where the existing metro runs on 750V DC. 4 new metro lines (15, 16, 17, 18) will be 1500V DC, with line 18 being powered via a 3rd rail, the others overhead.
@@cerealport2726 Yep and your RER system, which looks much more like suburban Sydney Trains, has both 1500 v dc and 25 kv ac. Lots of people here think rigid standardisation is the only design criteria. Very old fashioned. The Paris systems rock!
Because technology changes all the time and it is easier to upgrade signalling or trains built at different times on a line by line basis rather than on an entire system. More importantly different lines have different passenger and frequency demand, and using a common train that is big enough for all is overkill and overpriced for everywhere else. Nothing new there, Sydney Trains uses a variety of train types and used different lengths a lot more in the past.
This is an excellent video that you can be proud of. I much prefer the look of these trains, and I love the seating layout. I do think that a 4 or 6 car train is preferable for the airport line. Great video, well done Elliot 👏 👍
Thanks John! I do agree on your point of these trains looking better, hopefully they make the trains longer sometime in the near future! Thanks for watching! :)
The metropolis will start to become outdated when these enter service on western Sydney airport and metro west so makes sense to use different trains due to different specifications too.
Having shorter trains means the line would run short, but frequent services so you never have to wait long for the next one, think current peak M1 services but all day. Plus the new sets are wider to help accommodate bulky luggage
The rollingstock for Metro West hasn't been chosen yet, so there's a chance that they could also use (longer) Inspiros. AC electrification and a heavier loading gauge is always welcome, and they really should've gone with AC when they built the M1.
@@airlineshow That makes sense. Sadly I assume there are no plans to upgrade Sydney Trains to AC, even after the Tangaras get withdrawn. There are probably much bigger fish to fry.
The reason it is a different train and is using different power is due to the M1 being built on older lines and use older and less efficient power supply. So when they build the M1 they don't need to change the wiring and tracks.
They were selected many months ago, but this is the first time I’ve seen artists impressions (which often vary a bit from the final product) in WSI teal livery. The stations and trains can be expanded to 4 car sets, just like the existing 6 car metros can be expanded to 8. I did the numbers on another clip site and that size mini metro is fine for the expected load, if anything a bit generous initially. Metros are usually stand alone systems designed specifically for the lines characteristics. Having big trains and stations all the same size on different lines is a huge waste of money and irresponsible use of energy. It’s pretty easy to work out service frequencies by looking at the line length of 23 km, number of stations (6), typical line speed 80 to 100 mph. With six trains running each way it means they are averaging one station length apart, and run each way about every 4 to 5 minutes. Capacity can be increased by adding the 4th car, and increasing the number of trains to enable 2 minute headways. In addition you can already see provision for construction of a second metro line from Westmead paralleling this one under Elizabeth drive and through the airport. That probably will happen in about 2050 to 2060, when the second runway is operating and annual airport movements are about 8 times that when it first opens.
I don't mind the train's aesthetics as long as it can be used on Existing Metro lines. If they're gonna connect the WSA with the existing metro lines, then they might need to do something about the electrification systems if the line was to be continuous, they also need to either upgrade St Marys or Schofields stations to allow for underground cross-platform transfers. I also think the South west Rail link should stay as a Sydney trains line. In fact, I think we should be expanding the Sydney Trains network as well as work on the Metro.
I completely agree. Normally with these digital images, they end up adding a few more little parts to the train after hearing feedback from the community, so let’s hope that adding lugs racks is one of them! 🤞
Never trust artists impressions. For example look at the depictions of the airport terminal layouts in the online documents. Nothing like the final real version. The design notes say the trains are specifically designed for easy luggage carrying, so it’s very likely it will have wider aisles and luggage spots.
I guess they could run them more frequently to get vancouver skytrain capacities, but now the question arises, how is it possible to do with just TWELVE trains? Also I think just building a branch of sydney trains, but using single decker trains like in the other australian cities would have been a better idea for this line.
Single deck is preferable for people with luggage. Nothing to say Sydney can’t have single deck Sydney Trains on lines where it is preferable. Human driven ( or remotely driven by humans, just like the new airport control tower will be remote with camera systems and displays, not actually at the airport), faster, cheaper standard design but locally built. Example is for local services Revesby - KSA (old) Airport - Inner West through CityCircle. Double deck are preferable for longer runs like limited stops on full length of T2/8.
By the time the airport and Aerotropolis (a name I dislike) have been developed to the size where more than a three car metro is needed, the technology will have changed sufficiently that these Siemen trains will be obsolete and will require replacement anyway. The entire thing is stupid and short-sighted though. We should have been like Europe and built a north-south high speed train platform and infrastructure under the new airport terminal with a branch line high speed service to Central. Make the Western Sydney Airport, Sydney’s intra-state, inter-state, and international transport hub. Then the federal and state governments can start a dedicated high speed rail project from the cities moving in incremental stages to start revenue services before ultimately linking up. E.g.: Concurrently, Sydney builds north to Newcastle with a stop in Gosford, and south to Canberra via Wollongong, Moss Vale, and Goulburn. Melbourne goes west, north-west, and north. West to Geelong, north-west to Ballarat and Bendigo, and north to Wodonga. Brissie goes north and south. North to Noosa, and south to Balina via Coolangatta. Adelaide goes east to Mildura and south-east to Mount Gambier. Then natural extensions occur beyond these ultimately linking Perth, Alice, Darwin, and Cairns via Townsville to the routes. Sorry Hobart. No train to you… but you deserve a better car ferry service.
Bruh they can run the williamstown and alamein shuttles they way too small to do a busy metro line with passengers from around the whole world cramming into 3 measly carriages
Semen Inspiro?😮 They were the Siemens brothers but I think that might be going a bit too far😂 The track is the same "gorge" for both Metropolis and Inspiro (I assume you meant gauge) but I believe the Inspiro cars themselves will be wider. The train choice is made by the successful consortium. Interoperability between lines was clearly not included in the project documentation.
what's the bet there'll be a $20 surcharge at the airport station like there is on the existing domestic and international airport now? i can almost guarantee it
this new rail line being a metro is a mistake. It should have been built with regular double decker train compatability. connecting the two airports together are vital
If I was doing it, it would be part of metro west. Then you can go from the new airport to the cbd via major hubs like parramatta. Would also ease crowding on the Penrith and parramatta mainlines
No mention of the 25K voltage and the wider cars which makes them incompatible with the rest of the metro fleet. Hopeless planning. As inflexible as possible
Just do the math. 15 Minutes from St Marys to the Airport & there 12 trains. If all 12 operate and allowing for them to go to Bradfield & switch track for the return run. Your looking at 4 minutes at peak. They won't run 24/7 as there will be no trains at St Marys to transfer to overnight. The 3 car trains will also have less seats to allow for passengers to have their luggage with them. In reality most people will catch express buses or get picked up by car. The Airport Metro was a political decision anyway just to appease Greenies.
For an airport where having 24hr operations is a big selling point, it is an odd planning decision to have an entire mode of public transport unavailable for a long period overnight. Even if there would be no trains to interchange with at St Marys there are still local residents that would benefit. The airport needed a rail connection however the route leaves residents in South Western Sydney stuck reliant on buses or cars to get to there, otherwise they would have to make a long detour.
Comparisons with existing stock are pretty meaningless, these trains have a wider loading gauge, different electrification, have different signalling and be operated by a seperate consortium. Three cars was deemed sufficient- the line will be very lightly patronaged on opening. Also, connecting the two airports not a priority. Nobody will be transferring between flights from two different airports.
As mentioned in the video and based off my personal opinion - I do believe that 3 cars is OK for the lines opening, but having 4 cars may be a good idea after a few years of operation. And with the connections between the two airports, there is no need whatsoever for any connections to anything at the moment to connect the both airports but maybe something in the future.
It's acceptable that the new metro line will use 3-car trains as the Downtown Line on the Singapore MRT runs 3-car trains, yet had a ridership of 250,000. Also, since the new metro line runs through currently very underdeveloped areas, it isn't entirely necessary for longer trains. However, if there was a fourth luggage car (seen in Hong Kong) that would free up space on the train for seats which would be otherwise blocked by suitcases.
I would say a luggage car on that line is a bit redundant as most people would be changing to the T1 (& possibly the Blue Mt Line) at St. Mary's for further travel.
seems metro west will run on 25kV AC power, while the other metro network runs on 1.5kV DC. even if you wanted train interchangeability, power supply is going to be a problem.
Metro west and WSI metro are both 25 kV ac. Thats the modern standard and used in places like Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide. 1500 v dc is early 20th century stuff and more expensive. We should be upgrading to that standard whenever and wherever possible. Albeit that’s not simple in such an entangled system of lines like Sydney Trains.
The initial metro is probably 1500 v dc because of its close proximity to other Sydney Trains. BTW India converted its old systems to 25 kV ac years ago. If you want long distance VFTs in the future the 25 kV ac system is very much the choice.
Metros are designed best using separate unentangled lines with exchanges (cross platform where the geography allows it) where needed. I suspect you will see one at or around the SW Link and at or around Schofields in the future.
@@tacitdionysus3220 Fair enough. I live in Paris, where the existing metro runs on 750V DC.
4 new metro lines (15, 16, 17, 18) will be 1500V DC, with line 18 being powered via a 3rd rail, the others overhead.
@@cerealport2726 Yep and your RER system, which looks much more like suburban Sydney Trains, has both 1500 v dc and 25 kv ac. Lots of people here think rigid standardisation is the only design criteria. Very old fashioned. The Paris systems rock!
As a local Western Sydney Trainspotter. I would love to see thwm in action on camera in the near future! Thanks for the shoutout, It means alot!
Honestly we need diversity in the trains being used for Sydney’s metro
fair enough, but why?
Because technology changes all the time and it is easier to upgrade signalling or trains built at different times on a line by line basis rather than on an entire system. More importantly different lines have different passenger and frequency demand, and using a common train that is big enough for all is overkill and overpriced for everywhere else. Nothing new there, Sydney Trains uses a variety of train types and used different lengths a lot more in the past.
@@cerealport2726 idk because it’s common for metro systems to use more than one type of set
Imagine how outdated the first metro trains will be when metro west enters service
Thanks for this. Can't wait to see it all get going.
This is an excellent video that you can be proud of. I much prefer the look of these trains, and I love the seating layout. I do think that a 4 or 6 car train is preferable for the airport line. Great video, well done Elliot 👏 👍
Thanks John!
I do agree on your point of these trains looking better, hopefully they make the trains longer sometime in the near future!
Thanks for watching! :)
@@tsetstransport you're very welcome 👍
The metropolis will start to become outdated when these enter service on western Sydney airport and metro west so makes sense to use different trains due to different specifications too.
Having shorter trains means the line would run short, but frequent services so you never have to wait long for the next one, think current peak M1 services but all day. Plus the new sets are wider to help accommodate bulky luggage
The rollingstock for Metro West hasn't been chosen yet, so there's a chance that they could also use (longer) Inspiros. AC electrification and a heavier loading gauge is always welcome, and they really should've gone with AC when they built the M1.
I think M1 had to the same as Sydney Trains due to running parallel at Chatswood-1500vDC. They deemed dual voltage to be too costly
@@airlineshow That makes sense. Sadly I assume there are no plans to upgrade Sydney Trains to AC, even after the Tangaras get withdrawn. There are probably much bigger fish to fry.
This would be great idea im excited to see the new metro station coming up soon
train example at 6:01, that was submitted by Hyundai Rotem.
Ah, thanks for letting me know!
Honestly I prefer that design over what they ended up choosing.
The reason it is a different train and is using different power is due to the M1 being built on older lines and use older and less efficient power supply. So when they build the M1 they don't need to change the wiring and tracks.
They were selected many months ago, but this is the first time I’ve seen artists impressions (which often vary a bit from the final product) in WSI teal livery. The stations and trains can be expanded to 4 car sets, just like the existing 6 car metros can be expanded to 8.
I did the numbers on another clip site and that size mini metro is fine for the expected load, if anything a bit generous initially. Metros are usually stand alone systems designed specifically for the lines characteristics. Having big trains and stations all the same size on different lines is a huge waste of money and irresponsible use of energy.
It’s pretty easy to work out service frequencies by looking at the line length of 23 km, number of stations (6), typical line speed 80 to 100 mph. With six trains running each way it means they are averaging one station length apart, and run each way about every 4 to 5 minutes. Capacity can be increased by adding the 4th car, and increasing the number of trains to enable 2 minute headways.
In addition you can already see provision for construction of a second metro line from Westmead paralleling this one under Elizabeth drive and through the airport. That probably will happen in about 2050 to 2060, when the second runway is operating and annual airport movements are about 8 times that when it first opens.
I don't mind the train's aesthetics as long as it can be used on Existing Metro lines. If they're gonna connect the WSA with the existing metro lines, then they might need to do something about the electrification systems if the line was to be continuous, they also need to either upgrade St Marys or Schofields stations to allow for underground cross-platform transfers. I also think the South west Rail link should stay as a Sydney trains line. In fact, I think we should be expanding the Sydney Trains network as well as work on the Metro.
Nice informative video Elliot! I hope that they’ll also expand Sydney train network sometime.
Contractually, and technically shifting trains between M1 and Sydney Airport Metro would be very difficult
Cheers for the shoutout
Awesome video!!
I think what the trains really need is a designated luggage place. It's an airport link after all
I completely agree. Normally with these digital images, they end up adding a few more little parts to the train after hearing feedback from the community, so let’s hope that adding lugs racks is one of them! 🤞
Never trust artists impressions. For example look at the depictions of the airport terminal layouts in the online documents. Nothing like the final real version. The design notes say the trains are specifically designed for easy luggage carrying, so it’s very likely it will have wider aisles and luggage spots.
I guess they could run them more frequently to get vancouver skytrain capacities, but now the question arises, how is it possible to do with just TWELVE trains?
Also I think just building a branch of sydney trains, but using single decker trains like in the other australian cities would have been a better idea for this line.
Single deck is preferable for people with luggage. Nothing to say Sydney can’t have single deck Sydney Trains on lines where it is preferable. Human driven ( or remotely driven by humans, just like the new airport control tower will be remote with camera systems and displays, not actually at the airport), faster, cheaper standard design but locally built. Example is for local services Revesby - KSA (old) Airport - Inner West through CityCircle. Double deck are preferable for longer runs like limited stops on full length of T2/8.
This metro line is very odd
By the time the airport and Aerotropolis (a name I dislike) have been developed to the size where more than a three car metro is needed, the technology will have changed sufficiently that these Siemen trains will be obsolete and will require replacement anyway.
The entire thing is stupid and short-sighted though.
We should have been like Europe and built a north-south high speed train platform and infrastructure under the new airport terminal with a branch line high speed service to Central.
Make the Western Sydney Airport, Sydney’s intra-state, inter-state, and international transport hub.
Then the federal and state governments can start a dedicated high speed rail project from the cities moving in incremental stages to start revenue services before ultimately linking up.
E.g.:
Concurrently, Sydney builds north to Newcastle with a stop in Gosford, and south to Canberra via Wollongong, Moss Vale, and Goulburn.
Melbourne goes west, north-west, and north. West to Geelong, north-west to Ballarat and Bendigo, and north to Wodonga.
Brissie goes north and south. North to Noosa, and south to Balina via Coolangatta.
Adelaide goes east to Mildura and south-east to Mount Gambier.
Then natural extensions occur beyond these ultimately linking Perth, Alice, Darwin, and Cairns via Townsville to the routes.
Sorry Hobart. No train to you… but you deserve a better car ferry service.
The front part of the video got me cracking up
nice video!
This metro should have been extended to at least tallawong
Bruh they can run the williamstown and alamein shuttles they way too small to do a busy metro line with passengers from around the whole world cramming into 3 measly carriages
Semen Inspiro?😮
They were the Siemens brothers but I think that might be going a bit too far😂
The track is the same "gorge" for both Metropolis and Inspiro (I assume you meant gauge) but I believe the Inspiro cars themselves will be wider.
The train choice is made by the successful consortium.
Interoperability between lines was clearly not included in the project documentation.
what's the bet there'll be a $20 surcharge at the airport station like there is on the existing domestic and international airport now? i can almost guarantee it
this new rail line being a metro is a mistake. It should have been built with regular double decker train compatability. connecting the two airports together are vital
If I was doing it, it would be part of metro west. Then you can go from the new airport to the cbd via major hubs like parramatta. Would also ease crowding on the Penrith and parramatta mainlines
No more heavy rail in Sydney. It's all single deck Metro from now on.
Gauge rhymes with cage my dude 4:53
Yes of course, I’ll change my accent just for you.
No mention of the 25K voltage and the wider cars which makes them incompatible with the rest of the metro fleet. Hopeless planning. As inflexible as possible
Just do the math. 15 Minutes from St Marys to the Airport & there 12 trains. If all 12 operate and allowing for them to go to Bradfield & switch track for the return run. Your looking at 4 minutes at peak. They won't run 24/7 as there will be no trains at St Marys to transfer to overnight. The 3 car trains will also have less seats to allow for passengers to have their luggage with them. In reality most people will catch express buses or get picked up by car. The Airport Metro was a political decision anyway just to appease Greenies.
For an airport where having 24hr operations is a big selling point, it is an odd planning decision to have an entire mode of public transport unavailable for a long period overnight. Even if there would be no trains to interchange with at St Marys there are still local residents that would benefit.
The airport needed a rail connection however the route leaves residents in South Western Sydney stuck reliant on buses or cars to get to there, otherwise they would have to make a long detour.
why do they like to make the metro look increasingly worse
Comparisons with existing stock are pretty meaningless, these trains have a wider loading gauge, different electrification, have different signalling and be operated by a seperate consortium. Three cars was deemed sufficient- the line will be very lightly patronaged on opening.
Also, connecting the two airports not a priority. Nobody will be transferring between flights from two different airports.
As mentioned in the video and based off my personal opinion - I do believe that 3 cars is OK for the lines opening, but having 4 cars may be a good idea after a few years of operation.
And with the connections between the two airports, there is no need whatsoever for any connections to anything at the moment to connect the both airports but maybe something in the future.
what a funny train name
💀
First
Ugly train just like the north western metro.asian train?no thanks
Ok 😅