NWRL - Questions for the Minister

The following is an extract from a letter received by the Trust after the NWRL open meeting:

Why do you maintain the half truth that leading capital cities have a metro when the truth is that most of those metros were built over a century ago as solutions to a problem Sydney does not have,  namely having to terminate outer-suburban trains at the edge of the CBD, & it is publicly acknowledged by, amongst others, Howard Collins that those cities would be far better off if they did not have the metro "we have small trains; I'm pretty impressed by the double deck 2000 capacity trains in Sydney" (ABC interview 21 March 2013)

Why do you maintain that metro style trains can carry more passengers than double deck trains, which have twice as many seats as metros, when your proposition is only achievable by assuming all the seats to be occupied & the rest to be occupied by standing passengers at the unpleasant rate of 4 per square metre? It is not frivolous to note that in Japan there are segregated carriages to avoid groping & on many packed metro systems pickpocketing is rife.

Why do you continue to maintain that double deck trains are incapable of achieving the frequency of metros when, eg in Paris, double deck trains achieve 30 trains per hour?

The feature of metro carriages to which you most frequently refer is that they can load & unload more quickly than our double deck trains because they have three doors. Are you aware that our carriages could be progressively replaced with double deck three door trains such as are being put into service overseas?

Northern line considerations -

Another feature upon which you focus is that the NWRL will have a frequency of twelve trains per hour in peak times. It goes without saying that a private operator will only run trains out of peak times at a frequency which will turn a profit per train. Using Cheltenham as an example the scheduled travelling time to Wynyard is 38 to 40 minutes. What assurances can passengers travelling to & from the city on the Northern line have that trains, out of peak, will be co-ordinated at Epping so that the present travelling time, which has been the same for about 100 years, will not be exceeded by the privately run system?

One of the reasons for taking Northern line passengers to the city via Chatswood was to reduce overcrowding on the lines between Strathfield & Redfern. Why do you euphemistically state that to avoid changing at Epping & Chatswood, Northern line passengers may travel to the city via Strathfield when, if this offer is taken up in sufficient numbers, you will reintroduce overcrowding between Strathfield & Redfern & why do you fail to observe that the train will terminate at Central where those wishing to travel further will have to extend their journey time by changing trains?