Re: First Stop Central?

["Paul Jones" <dj_argon@geocities.com>]

My guess is that it sounds quicker. When i was doing work experience at st
lennards, i would catch the train from rivo to blacktown, change for the
express to sydney terminal, and then get a north shore train. this exercise
usually saved about 10-25 mins, and since i hate slow, all stations trains,
i didn't get too impatient. on one occation i ended up in the same train i
got off. i just wish they had an express v-set that did
Richmond-riverstone-quakers hill-blacktown-paramatter-strathfield-centeral
:) I realy feel sorry for the people who have to catch the blacktown-gosford
via north shore!

--
Paul Jones

Paul Hogan wrote in message <358284f3.0@139.134.5.33>...
>Here's one for all the CityRail experts - on Weds this week I caught a
>diverted Intercity peak hour service from Hornsby via the Up shore,
>partly out of curiosity as to how well the system was coping with the
>Concord derailment aftermath.
>
>The journey was about as slow as expected, due to the difficulty
>of finding  extra paths on the Shore at that hour of day (8.10 am
>ex Hornsby). It took a full hour to get to Central, with the last 20
>mins spent between Milsons Point and Central, including lengthy stops
>WLC in the tunnel outside Town Hall and Wynyard.
>
>The service was advertised at Hornsby as "first stop Central" , and
>that strategy successfully deterred most regular City via shore commuters
>from boarding. On arrival at Central 18 Platform, I estimate that about
>40% of passengers transferred to 16 platform and joined an already
>packed Down shore service to go back to Town Hall and Wynyard!
>
>There must be a logical reason for this, although I've noted in
>emergencies that operational dictates take precedence over passenger
>considerations and sometimes common sense. The two popular theories
>seem to be  -
>
>a.  Additional stops, even if "set down"only will increase delays
>     and congestion at the underground stations. However, the back-
>     loading I witnessed on the next down Shore service seems to
>     defeat this argument somewhat.
>b.  An 8 car V set is too long for the platforms in the underground
>    and having unlocked doors on carriages still in the tunnel
>    is deemed unsafe. (Even so, this situation still arose at Central
>    suburban platforms, resulting in passengers having to walk through
>    the train to alight.)
>
>Any alternate theories or explanations? I'm sure David Johnson has one!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Paul Hogan  (no, not that one).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>