That's good for my sake, probably not for the state though :/

You could have said you wanted to run steam trains on the line powered by burning money and it wouldn't be as bad as some. Though it was also a good proposal in its own right. 👍

@@zman1508 I know. And for saving Dapto, perhaps Koalaman could save the Dapto area by electrifying the line down there from Kiama all the way to Nowra, actually building the bridge. That would make the trip to Centrelink better ;

The standard run for the DMU’s was all the way to Newcastle from Toronto. The line wasn’t electrified due to the extra current that would have been required to power the branch line.

@@gregessex1851 I thought it was mostly the first and last runs of the day that went north from Fassifern. To Broadmeadow anyway. Though ISTR a Toronto to Sandgate service at one state. I may be remembering wrong though. 🙂

Oh I plan to. I've been really enjoying looking into a lot of the older forgotten lines in NSW. I might make this a regular series if I'm honest.

@@CityConnectionsMedia The northern river line to Murwillumbah is one that the locals wanted reopened, but Gvt still shut it down anyway - the track is in bad repair now. It's a huge tourism area and a missed opportunity to relieve road congestion and also provide heavy freight transposrt to the area in my opinion. I look forward to seeing the series, various NSW gvts have let regional rail nearly die and have really hurt many communities.

I agree with you and the line was originally intended to be extended to the Gold Coast. The cost of building a bridge over the Tweed River was the issue with the Queensland and NSW Government unable to agree on a solution. The service to Murwillumbah was called the Gold Coast Motorail Express until the XPT was introduced which suggests the intention of the extension.

@@aussiejohn5835 the trains from the airport could run down as far as Coffs Harbour -giving an easy way to get all the way to Coffs from the airport that is cheaper than flying there. Also rebuild the Ballina spur line and add that to the network (for frieght as well)

@David McCarthy I agree with you 👍. We just need a Government that is willing to build and not destroy.

you could also do the same for oberon to tarana

@@alexandersmith7777 Another line that should never been closed cheers bob.🚆

I wanted to talk about those so badly, but it would have made the video 10 minutes longer. Maybe I'll do a follow up and talk about some the minor projects that could improve transport in the Hunter.

A) I really wanted to look over the actual passenger numbers for the video, but I sadly couldn't find them in my research. I just decided to breeze over it since that seems to be the commonly accepted narrative. B) That probably was a contributing factor, although that's something that could be easily resolved through better scheduling C) That sounds reasonable, but that's not the sort of thing I could verify, and I wasn't alive at the time to know for myself. It was probably a contributing factor though. D) I agree that would probably be a contributing factor. Although you do mention that both Glendale and Kotara are near rail lines. There's no reason we couldn't improve rail access to both as a way to boost patronage. I was going to talk about the Glendale interchange in the video, but I just forgot. I might talk about it in a future video tbh. E) I agree that was probably a contributing factor, but I highly doubt it would caused that much of a blow, although I could be mistaken. F) I agree, but there are plans to construct a light rail line between the two. So that'll become less of an issue in future imo. I'm probably going to do a video on that in future sometime too. Youre first point there, I have mixed feelings on it. On one hand, I agree that the current short north isn't perfectly aligned with where people want to go today, but I did try to frame my proposal more in the context that it should be part of a regional transport project. While it may no be perfect today, give it 20 years of proper intergration into an expanded bus and light rail network, you'll see things change. I probably should have talked more about this in the video, but it was running too long already. I also agree with your point on the buses, but I never said local buses should be cancelled or directly replaced by rail service. The Toronto-Fassifern train in my proposal would be more like a suburban line, where it serves people going from Toronto to Cardiff or Newcastle, not really people going from Toronto to Fassifern. Buses/Bikes/Cars etc will always be faster and more convenient in that regard. As for your final two points. I agree with the neccessity of level boarding, stuff like that is why I generenally over estimate my cost analysises, because that stuff is more difficult to assess and calculate without actually doing a full report on it. But yh, even back in the 1990s you can see a large step between the train and the platform which would need to be rectified. Parking I'm divided on. Blackalls park I don't believe would need much more parking than it already has. I view Blackalls park less as a full station and more as a pickup/drop off point for commuters. Its right in the middle of the suburb, so anyone who needs to get there could easily walk. If they really need to drive to the station for whatever reason. There's plenty at Fassifern, and I wouldn't oppose providing parking at my proposed new Toronto station. That empty site that I said that could be used for a future bus interchange could just as easily be used as a temporary commuter carpark. So for the most part, I agree with parking at Fassifern and Toronto, but not at Blackalls Park. But this is the sort of thing that needs to be addressed in a proper report, which I'm not qualified to do as of yet. Also, thanks for your comment! I appreciate you taking the time to challenge what I've put forward here.

@@CityConnectionsMedia Beware the devil in the detail for providing new services. The concept of a "Pickup / Drop Off point" is no longer acceptable for new infrastructure. Under the accessibility requirements that the NSW Government (and other states) signed up to a long time ago, as well as level platforms, accessible entry points, one of the requirements is appropriate disabled car parking - I know this sounds odd, but street parking near the train station is not acceptable in the accessibility standards. Just check out Wallarobba Station and as part of the upgrade they had to include a disability car park - it is the only sealed car park at the station (and yes the ramp is several times longer then the platform itself) What happened with electrification in 1984, was there was an significant increase in passenger services. Previously there was an hourly direct service Newcastle to Toronto, this became a service every 20 minutes from Newcastle to Fassifern with connection to Toronto in 1984. This was a failure and did not see a boost in suburban traffic. The hourly direct service to Sydney was a winner There was a report that came out around 1990 that the recommendation to close the Toronto line was accepted, but the report also recommended the closure of Booragul, Teralba, Cockle Creek, Kotara and Adamstown stations - there was a backdown on this and the off peak / weekend services were slashed to every two hours, where the Interurban Services stopped all stations, there was some augmentation with weekday Morriset services at a later time, but the numbers were never there. As for Westfield Kotara. A station could be constructed near Northcott Drive, which would be a couple of blocks away. The issue is the line though this area is elevated and would not be an easy build - an expensive station where there was a desire to close suburban stations as they were underperforming . Similar excuses for when the Glendale Shopping Centre was built

I can see your point with Wallarobba station, I do disagree however. Blackalls park is level with the road. For the most part, you wouldn't need a ramp to provide disabled access, just the normal curb ramp from a disabled park, which is already provided. I had a quick google too and it seems that on street parking is fine, as long as a curb ramp and proper signage are installed, but I'm not familiar with disability standard so I'm willing to be corrected. You're probably right there. I'd say the success of that service over the shuttle probably proves it would have been worthwhile to electrify and continue the direct services. I'd love to see that report if you could get your hands on it. I'd love to see the governments own rationale in their own words. That would be my suggested location too, and I'd agree that would be an issue as well. As for stations underperforming, I could point to your previous point about how the Short North doesn't serve places that people want to go. Kotara, Adamstown, Teralba station etc don't, so comparing a station near Glendale or Westfield Kotara wouldn't be fair. They'd perform more similar to stations like Cardiff or Fassifern imo.

That's good to hear! Thankyou

@@CityConnectionsMedia subscribed and looking forward to more.

There's always one topic I forget to mention, and apparently it's Inland Rail. it would also greatly reduce the amount freight trains.

not as much as you would think. Mainly because a lot of these freight trains between Melbourne and Brisbane also stop in Sydney to drop and pickup.

@@carisi2k11 That's true, although even if only 10% of trains use inland rail, that'll still provide a good boost to capacity.

How'd your inspection go? I'm hoping my statement wasn't too far off reality.

The bridge is fine. NSW really takes bridge inspections seriously. Especially after Granville.

Good to hear!

@@zman1508 When was it?

Yes!

Don't worry, all of those lines are on my to do list. I'm really enjoying doing deep dives on some of the Abandoned lines around NSW. Current plan is to talk about either Camden or Kurrajong line, followed by the Murwillumbah line. I'll make sure to slot the Westmead/Rogan's hill, Ropes Creek, Belmon, and Picton to Mittagong line in my schedule though!

@@CityConnectionsMedia I hope they get done soon! If you want, the Belmont & Toronto Lines are in Open Rails Simulator. The Belmont line is also in Trainz Simulator without the Toronto Line unfortunately.

Nicole hammer the government on this issue,

There is a bus service that goes back n forth every half hour. There's hardly anyone on it. Why would the government invest billions to build a train line for a few people.

I might have to do a video on that. I've not looked into it much since I got out of high school, so I don't really have much to say atm.

I think the really difficult and expensive part would be crossing the river.

It's a really good idea, even though would be shut down by the Air Force (they think that the civilian use of the airport is interfering too much with their operations, they're probably going to have to build a new air force base further north if the Newcastle airport gets any busier). But it could be done. Branch off the Main North Line near Hexham, curve around north and east to Raymond Terrace and Medowie, then go south to the airport. That way it also provides direct access to two very car-dependent townships -- a lot of people live in Raymond Terrace and have to drive into Newcastle for work! You could also use this as a way of building some better freight bypasses or even a better route for the North Coast Line to Brisbane. A freight line could go north from Kooragang to a hypothetical airport freight terminal and then along the airport corridor, while intercity trains (maybe even high-speed trains, fingers crossed) could get a new line that follows the M1 via Raymond Terrace and Buladelah to Taree instead of looping around through Dungog.

I could see that too. My only critique would be that most people are travelling to Newcastle, not to Maitland, so you'd still need a direct service anyway. Also, you could just electrify to Maitland too and then re-allocate the diesels.

@@CityConnectionsMedia I think there'd be a lot of people heading to the University (Warrabrook) too. And since to get to the Newcastle CBD from the Interchange currently requires using the light rail anyway, it wouldn't add much to the journey time by making the change at Broadmeadow instead.

Funnily enough, I used that organisations website as one of my sources, but for whatever reason I just forgot to talk about it. It would have been really cool if it did happen. I might have to see if I can track down those rail tractors, might be an interesting deep dive.

@@CityConnectionsMedia let us know if you find them. Am really curious to know.

@@CityConnectionsMedia You could do a video of them irl. Like Transport For NSW Vlogs went to thr retired Variotram storage area a few years ago.

@@TrainsForNSWVlogs Maybe, I'll be in that area next weekend actually.

@@CityConnectionsMedia Ok I hope you get there!

I actually originally considered something similar. Imo a tram-train like those in Central-Europe would work great in Newcastle. But I just decided to go in another direction for this vid. I might talk about it more in future though.

I haven't done a deep dive on it, so I don't really have any strong opinions at the moment. But I do intend on talking about it in the very near future.

Yes revive it and link it with a high speed intercity line

@neilforbes416 i dont think that idea would work

@@top40researcher31 It *DOES* work and is used extensively in Europe and Britain on single line railways.

@@neilforbes416 if this line would reopen it be as a tourist line

@@neilforbes416 i don't think its ever done in Australia

@@neilforbes416 interesting

It's an unfortunate reality, but it's still fun to propos/think about projects. I'd also be curious to work out precisely when steam locomotives were fully replaced, because I have photos of steam locomotives on the Toronto line as late as 1967. Although that could be because people were racing to photograph steam trains in their final years. It's probably like that by the 60s steam trains were mostly gone on the line, but diesels didn't fully take over until the late 60s/early 70s.

Rail trail lobby there isn't really existing since theres already a bike path next to the rail line. Place fencing and rerouting like 1 or 2 parts of the bike route and its fine. Having this be a starting point for reopening lines is good as the traffic is existing there, the bus routes are rubbish (thank private bus companies ruling over the busing network) and the line is in pretty good condition too, with only replacing rotten sleepers and a bridge and all that

I somewhat agree. The rail trail isn't a major concern since it exists alongside the line and would be able to remain even with the line open. So they're unlikely to oppose re-opening the line. I also agree that with how short the line is, it's difficult to justify reopening it on its own. That's why I tried to expand it to a Newcastle wide project, instead of just a Toronto project.

@@CityConnectionsMedia that does lend an interesting aspect.

People traveling to Sydney or Newcastle who can't/don't want to drive, and terminating local trains.

Understand their problem but the level crossings in question would be lucky to serve 50 houses each. Very low traffic volumes like that shouldnt cause any difficulties.

Well I don't like them either if I'm honest. But removing them would add millions more to the costs, so it's a choice of building two level crossings, or not providing rail service, and I'd certainly choose the former.

​@@CityConnectionsMedia far more important to provide service in my opinion also.

@@mikk4309 the first thing you learn about newcastle is their level of nimbyinsm is absolutely unmatched.

The level crossing thing would be more akin to Riverstone's level crossing (albiet excluding the heavy traffic from rouse hill, schofields into either Castle Hill or Blacktown) so wouldn't make any sense in blowing billions for minimal traffic

I really want to do a video on that sometime in the future.

@@CityConnectionsMedia That would be nice.

It could work? but then (depending on the system used) it would be incompatible with the main network, defeating the point.

very true. Apart from, you know, people not using them. Foam foam foam, foam foam foam, foam foam ...

Agreed!

I'm kinda agree with you. I do think people in the hunter are very averse to using public transport, but that's more because it's bad. No one uses the train or bus because the bus every every hour and takes 40 mins to go 10km. But that sort of issue is fixed by building public transport that people actually want to use. As for your final point, you're unfortunatley correct. Sydney has most of the votes in parliament, so it gets all the money, and Newcastle is all safe labor, so the liberals don't try because they know they won't win, and labor doesn't try because they know the liberals won't win.

Things do change over time though. Newcastle is one of the fastest growing cities in Australia, and it deperatly needs a solid public transport system, which it doesn't have. It's also important to remember that lots of people can't drive, or just prefer not to, so we need to create viable alternatives for them. And true, the government shouldn't pay for empty trains, but that more than likely wouldn't be the case. The line closed primarily due to lack of patronage, which was in part spurred by poor service. If you build a good service, people will use it.

I think with it only being a block, it would be fine. I would personally prefer to re-use the original station, but I think it's just more practical to use the station a bit further from the centre of town.

I know you save money on a crossing but you blow out your costs then having a new station. At old station would need a lift to get up the hillside at I understand 1.5 million each. But would be cheaper and closer to town centre.

It's less about spending money on the crossing and more that reintroducing it would cause traffic congestion, and would cause a lot of resentment from the locals. Although these sort of details would need to be sussed out before undertaking a project like this, and I can only really give my opinion.

@neilforbes416 to you it would be Wickham interchange but to everyone else it be newcastle

@neilforbes416 look at central station in sydney its at Haymarket

well if thats the case that would confuse a lot of communters going to Newcastle

@@Mediawatcher2023 It's labelled as "Central", not "Sydney Central". But Haymarket is a "precinct" of Sydney, not a suburb, just like Civic and Honeysuckle are "precincts" of Newcastle, not suburbs, because they lie well inside the Newcastle boundaries. Wickhama suburb, the southern boundary of which lies where the old level crossing boom gate used to be on the Newcastle side of the now-gone rail lines.

​@@neilforbes416 i was reading the latest survey since the rail line closed more and more people are coming into the city. They said its a big improvement.

They use common sense witch no one here has.

Government uses common sense ? 😅

That's the unfortunate reality :/

It could work, but depending how it would be done would bring up a few issus. If it's a light rail like in Newcastle or Sydney, then you couldn't run the trams on the mainline since they have different standards and OHLE voltages. If it's a tram-train like in Germany, it could work, but you'd then need proprietary rolling stock, which probably wouldn't be worthwhile for such a short stub. It'd just be easier and cheaper to use the existing double deck stock imo

no no, we definitley are in a climate crisis. The climate crisis issue isn't even up for debate at the moment. We have a scientific consesus, that there is a scientific consensus. We know the climate is changing, and we know we're the causing it. It is a valid concern that renewables are less reliable than fossil fuels, but fossil fuels aren't reliable either. It was natural gas plants failing that caused the texas power grid failure not long ago, not renewables. Even if we ignore that example, large scale grid interconnections and energy storage systems are going to ensure that renewables beat fossil fuels not only in price, but reliability and generation. Also, I don't know what 'yoof' you're talking to, but most people my age (early 20s) are fairly knowledgable, and know basic things like how electricity works. I was even taught how power generation works in primary school. If you're talking about believing in climate change as 'undereducated', again, the evidence for climate change is overwhelming. P.S. You're not shadow banned, this didn't even appear in my 'held for review' section

@@CityConnectionsMedia wow, fully brainwashed by the establishment. 1/Plymouth Rock, 400 years in the same place and it gets moistened at high tide. look it up. 2/ "scientific consensus" like the scientific consensus about "safe and effective".. 3/the U.N. (headed by a whitewashed Ethiopian terrorist), filled with UNELECTED bureaucrats funded by "vested interests" "partnered with" Google to slew climate change search results because "the U.N. "owns the science" on climate change".. SO, UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS , like those who peddled the whole covid thing, are to be trusted about THIS? 4/ dig deeper than the data those same agenda pushers are shoveling and see for yourself, prior to the Younger Dyas cataclysm the world was heating up and we were plunged back into an ice age that we are still recovering from. 5/ in earths history the planet was HOTTER and GREENER, plants need CO2 to survive, the more CO2 the greener the planet, the obscenely wealthy have invested great sums of capital into renewable energy, they want a return on their investments what ever the costs.. wake up before it's too late buddy. ps, you are one of the rare ones who remembers what they were indoctrinated with at school.. so, when they shut down all the power generators and we have to rely on "unreliable, yet to be perfected, renewables and everybody is told to "not charge your cars or power your air conditioners today because of excess load concerns" (california case in point), you can always rub two sticks together to light a fire now they took your gas stove because "global warming" this is nothing but MORE CONTROLLING THE PEASANTS.. (think the first "ANTS" movie.). "this isn't about the FOOD, it's about SECURING OUR WAY OF LIFE" says the obscenely wealthy who have been conditioned to believe Malthusian politics that "we are going to "run out" of "things" so we need to cull the minions".

1) So? A rock by the sea gets wet? I don't know what that's relevant to? 2) Consensus that what is 'safe and effective'? I'm presuming you mean vaccines, more specifically covid vaccines, in which case yes, they are safe and effective. If anything that's proven by the fact that whenever a minor issue arose, there was an investigation and occassionally the vaccine was recalled. 3) The current leader of the UN is Portugese, and the previous one was South Korean? Unless you're refering to the current leader of the WHO, who is Ethiopian, but the WHO is not the UN, it is part of the UN. Also, the UN doesn't do climate research (at least directly), it only coordinates research from national and private organisations. You might be getting confused with the IPCC, which is part of the UN and discusses climate change issues. What I want to ask you, is what reason would they have to lie? What does the UN, alongside almost every nation and scientist on the planet have to gain from faking climate change? If it's control, why focus on reducing pollution? Why not do what China or Russia do? 4) I'm not sure if that's true, although I'm not a climate scientist by education. 5) Depending on the era, that's true. It is also true that plants do like CO2, but the problem is everything has limits. Humans need oxygen, but if you put us in a pure oxygen environment, we die. It's the same with plants. Our modern plants evolved in certain atmospheric conditions, so changing that has negative impacts on them. The obscenly wealthy have also invested great sums into fossil fuels? if anything more so. The richest person in Australia is a mining magnate after all. I'm not sure being told how a coal fired power station works is indoctrination, but okay. How is trying to transition to a power source that pollutes less about control? Renewables work, and they're on par with fossil fuels. The only reason we're having issues with renewables at the moment is because changing an entire power grid is not an easy task. So of course there's issues. It's not like it can't be done, some regions are getting close, like Europe. Also, the gas stove thing is weird. That was just a proposal by a democrat in the US (iirc) and now a bunch of conservatives world wide have taken that as 'the left is coming for your gas stove'. No one talks about that. I have a gas stove, it's fine, I would prefer an induction one though, but that's just because it's more efficient and pollutes less. The transition to electric stoves is going to happen simply because it's cheaper and better for the environment. Final note, there is no such thing as infinite growth on a finite planet. We are overusing our planets resources, and we need to reduce consumption. While that's true, there's not real indication that the 'elites' are considering a 'purge of the proles'. There is a strong argument to change our economic system to not focus as much on economic growth, and to crack down on billionaire elites, because yeah, they have too much power.

I strongly disagree. The only reason the 'majority' of people drive is because we've spent the past 50 years shutting down and cutting rail/public transport services in the Hunter. This is even ignorning the fact that lots of people can't drive, or can't afford to do so. 200million sounds like a lot, but our government is spending 450million on finishing the inner city bypass, which will only make traffic worse. We need to move away from car dependancy, and improving public transport in the Hunter is one part of doing so. My proposal is mostly meant to go alongside improvements to bus services, and act more as a rail backbone. I would completley support spending 200 million on imporiving bus services if it were an option.

I agree for the most part. I generally try and overestimate to account for things I've not factored in, and there aren't many case studies I can point to for a better number. At least none that I can think of.

Oh I agree, I'm really not a fan of NIMBYism.

Great thought.