We will soon have a new Railway in Sydney, built by this current government with tunnels 40cm smaller than the current tunnels throughout the city system.

This system will be operated by a private company; no future government will be able to use the current rolling stock in the tunnels

For over 12 months I have being campaigning on this disturbing situation about to be delivered on our largest City.

The ‘Unblemished’ MSM have chosen to ignore my pleas and only one story has been offered to the unsuspecting public , by Quentin Dempster, on the ABC’s Friday 7.30 report -10th May 2013.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-10/breaking-bradfield-making-or-breaking-north-west/4682942

I think the situation should be investigated cause I smell a setup to protect the big end of town

SOUNDS LIKE A SCALED UP VERSION OF THE WHEELY BIN SCAM
[THAT WAS DESIGNED ON THE LIGHT BULB CONSPIRACY]
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=LIGHT+BULB+CONSPIRACY&

THAT GAVE US THE PRINTER INK CARTrAGE CONSPIRACY
THAT GAVE US ENRON..DOWNLOAD LIMITS AND SO MUCH MORE
GREED that quality that just keeps on giving

LIKE SMART METERS/WATER METERS..SERVICE CHARGES AND GST

but what can WE DO?
thery already got signed 'deals'
and we have no proof of conspiricy

MY SUGGESTION..MEASURE THE FIRST TUnnel..with proper surveying equipment..and go public with 15 SECOND ADVERTS GOING TO A WEB SITE OR YOU TUBE VIDIO

JUST A SIMPLE SE4ARTCH TERM/SLIPPED INTO LATE NIGHT TALKBACK..OR PAID ADVERTS[USE CROWD SOURCE FUNDING FOR THE ADVERTS/ASK THE QUESTION AT YAHOO ANSWERS..

DONT GIVE UP
IT JUST SOUNDS Expensively corruptly wrong

Who cares, it's only Sydney, which is really no longer part of the real Oz.

Tell me someone, do they still speak English in Sydney?

I thought the word "Coverup" meant that something was being, well, covered up. I can't see any evidence here that the government's plans are being concealed from anyone. They seem to be quite straightforward: we have an old rail system, we need a new one.

Successive NSW governments have allowed the system to become unworkable over a period of decades. The massive amount of maintenance work that is presently required on the system is caused, primarily, by the unsuitability of double-decker trains. So the only surprise is that someone seems at last to have grasped the nettle.

Converting over time to single-deck trains seems eminently sensible to me. Even though at the speed these things generally take I shall be pushing up daisies before ever setting foot on one.

Dude please our poor politician need to make some extra cash ts not like its easy living on a gazzillion dollars a week

@Pericles
The cover is “why build the tunnels 40cm smaller to stop any other train to enter them,?” that is the cover up, you can run single deck trains in the current tunnels. Please watch the video link – it tells it all; I will not comment on your other silly Tory rants

40cm YES 40cm Smaller in Diameter; to save money?

Maybe the master plan is to insure the private sector will always maintain a monopoly position; as the plan is a PPP one. I fully support well planed PPP’s in the public interest.

Is this not lunacy in the extreme, even if you want to run single deck, Metro style, trains in the short term? This may be very desirable on some inner city lines.

And then to build the same size tunnel across the harbour to Redfern to integrate with the current network? Unbelievable.

From the proposed end of the line at Cudgegong Rd to Riverstone Station is less than 5km to join with the Richmond line to complete the loop and give access from north west Sydney to western Sydney. But all this would be lost in this private plan.

Is this a repeat of what happened in the 1870’s between Sydney and Melbourne in respect of rail gauge? In part this was fixed by duel gauge lines; but to re-bore a tunnel? Maybe they will build the track in narrow gauge at 3’6” and complete the ‘fire wall’ between City Rail (or Sydney Rail or whatever) and the overseas investors. One thing to remember; what about the national interest in a time of emergency? Remember the Second World War when our war effort was disrupted at Albury/Wodonga.

Recently I heard the best idea in this debate, made by a Union official in the field, “Why not build a new 4-6 lane road tunnel under the harbour and use the current two eastern lanes on the bridge for rail, as it was first designed in the 1920’s and has tunnels at each end to integrate into the current network”? Just a thought.

Please we must do something to STOP this nonsense and ensure the tunnels are built in the correct design for the sake of the nation!

see the vidio link
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-10/breaking-bradfield-making-or-breaking-north-west/4682942

Now, don't go getting your knickers in a twist, JMCC.

>>I will not comment on your other silly Tory rants<<

It is quite possible that someone might have a view that differs from yours, you know, without being a "silly Tory".

And frankly, I'm not at all sure which part of my position qualifies as a rant, of any kind. But no matter. Let's try to move on.

As a layman, but also a regular CityRail user, I can only hazard a guess at the details of the new system. But from observation, the sheer quantity of remedial work that is necessary on the present network must tell you something. Compare the amount of regular disruption-for-maintenance in Sydney compared to, say, London, and it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the current infrastructure - i.e. the lines themselves - are being subjected to undue strain from the rolling stock. Then notice that we are the only city to utilize double-decker carriages. Then ask a CityRail engineer why the lines are closed so often, and be told "it's the double-decker carriages; until we get rid of those, we will spend an increasing amount of time on remedial work".

Then glance at your "solution", which is to maintain the existing system, so that the rolling stock may continue to be used. Doesn't that, in all objective, non-political, bipartisan logic, simply guarantee that we perpetuate the problem. Doesn't it make sense instead to put together a new system that is cheaper to build and requires a tiny fraction of the maintenance?

No cover-up. No conspiracy of silence. No "master plan" to establish a private monopoly. Just an attempt to solve a problem that has been ducked by NSW governments, of both political persuasions, for far too long.

Sorry Pericles about the Tory thing.
On the rail maintenance; both sides of politics in NSW had allowed the rails and signals to run down in the passed 50 years until the mid 2000’s when an extensive program was undertaken to renew the rails and signals – the introduction of concrete sleepers and all welded rails and this is ongoing until all tracks are upgraded and all congratulations to the current government to maintain this program. On the control of train movements great progress has been made; Sydney Box controls all trains between Sydney and Waterfall, Wollongong between Wollongong and Kiama, Sydney between Sydney and MacArthur and Junee between MacArthur and Victoria etc;
May I note that the French government are about to introduce double deck rolling stock on their general metropolitan Paris system because the tunnels are the right size.
Did you watch the ABC video?

<<."it's the double-decker carriages; until we get rid of those, we will spend an increasing amount of time on remedial work".>>

THE ISSUE SEEMS TO BE TO GET A 'LIGHT RAIL'..TYPE OF RAIL SYSTEM/THATS a Stand alone privately owned franchise..[its not the foot in the door..to bring the whole rail system..down]..that being said..itS NOT going to change the breakdowns and rail closures in any way but up/as more travel the same old LINES/AFTER GETTING OFF..this new line

some THOUGHTS WERE THE TRAINS WOULD NEED LONGER STATION/platforms
and that isnt likely to be cheap/thus the two track SYSTem..is likely to remain/plus the exclusive franchise.[i hear no mention ..of any lease/FRANChise terms..[99/year or otherwise]...or who maintains/comtrols the timetables.

but it needs to be made a bigger issue..as its the forerunner of the ways to come[like in qld they going to give a 99 year lease oN THE PORT..for 4 billion/[now if that 4 billion is 'gradully paid..inflatION INDICATES THE YEARLY TRIFFLE NOT ONLY GETS Less each year...but does less

they give the lease up to build a stadium..but if that is paid for..on terms..yo match the port lease..we getting screwed FOR DEAD/INTREST FOR PENNIES BOTH WAYS.,

im against these private govt 'patnerships'..[iF THEY get the FINANCING..with govt/what has changed without govt..thats the key..WHAT HAS CHANGED...the capitalist gains THE PEOPLE GET SCREWED.

GOVT CAN Print its own money/at will..[oR RATHER COULD..but bankers stole this govt..franchise to create MONEY ..NOW GOVT TOO MUST PAY BANKER URSURY/ON TOP..

THAT BUILDS IN DEFLATION/WHICH HAS SEEN OUR COINAGE SYSTEM DEBASED..AND THE ACTUAL GOLD/SILVER CONTENT LOOTED..THATS THE PROBLEM..WITH BANKERS CREATING THE DEBT..BUT NOT THE INTREST/

THAT MONEY EXISTS..oNLY as DEBT AT INTEREST
has broken govts world wide..to the point they gift gift's they should build to capitalists repaying other banker CREATED FIAT FICTIONS[THE ONLY LAWDULL TENDER=COIN[FEDERAL CONSTITUTION..115]

The tunnels should be of a standard size compatible with Government rolling stock otherwise when the Privateers go broke the Govt.won't be able to integrate the system with State Rail.

Yes Mise,

that is what it's all about

There is still one question I haven't seen you address yet, JMCC.

Is it more or less expensive to build and maintain a system that supports single-decker rolling stock?

As presented, it would appear that single-decker is cheaper.

As the video makes clear, there is no drama attached to dual-mode co-existence, given that a good many of today's passengers change trains without giving it a second thought. So it may reasonably be concluded - unless you have evidence to the contrary - that the NorthWest extension will be cheaper both to build and to operate.

By the way, the whole tone of the Dempster report smacked of beat-up.

"Critics say this will lead to a break-up of the integrated double-deck public system designed by John Bradfield"

Bradfield had nothing to do with the introduction of double-decker trains, so could hardly be described - as the piece represented - as "turning in his grave". Unnecessary hyperbole.

He could be blamed, albeit indirectly, for building a system that encouraged the development and usage of rolling stock that was completely incompatible with his design. Without double-decker trains, there would be lower stress on the track. With lower stress on the track, there would be less need for continuous, and expensive, maintenance and/or replacement.