Will this fail?
>stations spaced every 1-3km
Depends on perspective. As a general answer, no, because it's part of a grand plan. The grand plan is to sell off the Sydney rail network in parts by way of "fake" privatisation where the infrastructure burden remains with the government but operation is given away on a diamond studded platter. In other terms, the public bears the cost while the operator pockets the $ and lines those of politicians (see: Metro Melbourne for a working example. MTR is slated to take this line. Somehow they are fucking amazing in Hong Kong but suck here, probably because they actually have to work for their $ in HK)
Station spacing is a relatively small issue since the distances at the outer edge are much like the rest of the Sydney suburban network - more stops will massively increase journey times as there will be no express services. Oh and they deliberately bought TBMs just too small for DDs
If you've checked out the train carriage exhibits, they hardly look fit for the 2020s era. When the working ones are delivered, they'll be overpriced curry scented alstom shit
And all the extra things tacked on don't really make sense. If they're going to branch the line, then it'll be impossible to do 30tph on the Bankstown line they want to lobotomise
The need to straighten out platforms for doors is a load of shit, more of a way to inflate the contract price to pay back mates. Japan does just fine putting platform doors on curved platforms
They trains are also physically smaller both ways. The width not too different to a Marunouchi Line train. If it was a completely isolated line, they could've done it like Seoul or Helsinki where the trains are fucking huge but instead they went for something shit
$5 says it'll be like Singapore where the trains are forever 6 cars long and overcrowded as shit because the government will be too cheap to buy more
Additional cash: Due to the construction schedule, they will be dumping everyone at Epping and Chatswood to join already full trains for years
>>936388
NSW INC: Working for corrupt fucking developers.
>>936403
This probably summed it up much more succinctly than my wall of text. Every council and the state government is corrupt to the end. Salim mehajer and gary goodman are just sketch comedies when pitched next to what casinomike is playing
>>936398
Is dat a bike rack
>>936398
>"fake" privatisation
>where the infrastructure burden remains with the government
Sounds like any 'good' 'real' privatisation. So they're pulling the good old starve and sell in Sydney? Is the provincial gov knee deep in debt or is some jackass politician leading some ideological crusade against public services?
>Somehow they are fucking amazing in Hong Kong but suck here
Probably comes down to funding honestly. Private 'operators' don't really operate their franchises in the end. They usually just keep things rolling along using the old framework and try to squeeze cash out of the system by raising fares or trying their hand at some union busting as a way to boost their profit margin back home.
And anyway, isn't the MTR massively subsidized? I know liberals love to bring up the MTR as a private sector success story but the infrastructure they exploit wouldn't exist were it not for the HK government financing their construction projects.
>>936398
>Oh and they deliberately bought TBMs just too small for DDs
LEL
E
L
What's the tunnel gauge? Did they seriously buy TBMs that are smaller than the Continental gauge just to spite the workers?
>>936424
Yes it is
>>936445
Quite the contrary. The government is leasing off the power distribution infrastructure for 99 years to finance the projects (in other terms, privatisation to pay for more privatisation). For the Metro Melbourne case, it's a matter of the operator doing the bare minimum. From that, they get a cut of the total public transport takings and whatever else is specified in the contract. They cancel services ahead of time when the forecast is for over 38 degrees, skip timetabled stations to make up time (and thus make money) and so forth. In the case of MTR, chances are the government did do the setting up, but afaik it's sustainable from then on as the fares go directly to them and they are responsible for other revenue services. Chances are if things went sour, MTR would feel the pinch for a while before the government steps in. On the other hand, if things go pear shaped in Melbourne, Metro would get handouts faster as they rely solely on the contract
Similar with MTR goes for things like Tokyo Metro - they're responsible for their own survival. I'm of the belief that if privatisation is to be done, it should be like that. And if the company goes to the shitters, the government can then buy them out for rock bottom prices. At the heart of it, it's what could've happened in Sydney. The AirportLink was done privately, then it went broke due to exorbitant station entry/exit fees. Instead of keeping the pieces, the government sold it off again. Same for toll roads. The tunnel ones in Sydney tend to go broke (one of them twice!) but the government still keeps them in private hands when it could've taken them for a bargain
>>936448
Yes. This has been well known for a while. It's union busting exercise since the RTBU has balls. Word that's been going around for at least a couple of years is that the the manufacturer offered appropriately sized TBMs for the same price
>>936571
>manufacturer offered appropriately sized TBMs for the same price
Fucking corrupt LNP scum. I want to get off this wild ride.
