Light Rail In Sydney: The Worst, And Best, Of Both Worlds

In this video, we're going to be looking at Sydney’s light rail system, examining its gradual return over the past twenty-five years, and comparing it to both buses and trains. For light rail can combine the best parts of the worlds of buses and trains...but it can also take the worst part of both of these worlds. This video will look at the L1 Dulwich Hill, L2 Randwick and L3 Kingsford Light Rail Lines that run through urban Sydney.

Music Credit:

[AheadMatthewawsome]

Popular Opinion: Getting rid of the trams in Sydney was the worst decision we ever made.

If we kept our trams, the Inner West, Eastern Suburbs, and the Lower Northern Beaches/North Shore would have way better services, and less congestion, especially coming from outer parts of Sydney, and would’ve been an amazing attraction in some of the more beautiful lines! Also another great video to do as well!

[nighty]

Sydney shouldn't give up on this light rail project! If the cbd becomes even more pedestrian friendly and with no lockout laws, we could see the renaissance of the CBD nightlife

[smurftums]

The Kingsford line (L3) needs to be extended to the old tram terminus at La Perouse. Also a light rail line needs to be built along Parramatta road, to at least as far as Homebush. For the Northern beaches, the tracks over the Harbour Bridge need to be re-installed and a light rail service built to Dee Why, in a way that allows for later upgrading to heavy rail if needed.

[vintageradio]

There is a misconception with the use of the term "light rail". Light rail, like metro rail and heavy rail do not refer to the vehicles, which are still called trams. Light rail is the name of the system. Trams are the big red things that run on the tracks. Even TFNSW has partly aknowledged this by remarking intersections as "Tram Only" instead of the previous "Light Rail Only" markings.

[Brendos]

I see your point around a missed opportunity in south east Sydney - however it wouldn't arrive until 2040s. The Metro Phase 2 and 3 were a higher priority - so Light Rail is welcome.
The L2/L3 was definitely criticized at first - but it's now packed even with city offices at 50% occupancy and moves quite quickly now that the traffic lights are connected and it's got permanent right of way. Not to mention, George Street pedestrianization was a major win. Think its time to forget the launch press and re-evaluate.

[russellhammond]

Love the current L2 and L3. Using it more and more these days.

[Michael-gdop]

The L2 and L3 light rail service in the city and eastern suburbs would be far more efficient and faster had the original plans been carried through to give the service priority at traffic light intersections.
The state government foolishly rejected this idea under the false perception that it would slow traffic 😒
The movement of public transport is far more spacially efficient than automotive transport and should hence have priority at traffic lights.
This would encourage patronage and reduce traffic flow

[johngore]

This is a good article. Congratulations! One thing which you mentioned but didn't elaborate on, is why light rail promotes so much development. From what I have read, developers are more likely to commit large sums of money where there is light rail since they know that the Government Transport heavies can not suddenly change the route of the light rail and leave them without adequate transport, thus making their project less desirable. This is one of the disadvantages of a bus route from the perspective of a developer. BTW I also agree with your comments on the Randwick light rail but given the proposed extension of the Sydney Metro West light to La Perouse by 2041, this should solve that problem. Removal of buses and cars from George Street has made a huge difference to the CBD.

[sarcasmo]

All fairly interesting. I love the Gold Coast light rail.

[andrewsmith]

I have lived in both Sydney and Melbourne.
Trams are great where they have dedicated corridors, which are mostly in CBD areas. In suburban areas where they share the road network they are terrible as vehicular traffic has to stop to allow tram passenger to walk into the middle of the road to get on/off. Buses can pull in to the kerb allowing other traffic to continue.
With the advances in electric vehicles, buses could operate by using the existing overhead wiring. With batteries they could travel 'off wire' for any routes through suburban areas and operate 'on wire' along major routes or major route sections. They could also go 'off wire' to pull in to the kerb. Recharging technology could be installed at depots.
Sydney's re-introduction of trams has caused major disruption where roads had to be dug up to install rails. If electric buses were used then only the overhead wires would need to be installed, saving a lot of time and money.
Buses don't carry as many passengers but larger buses and more frequent bus services would easily fix this problem. Investment, public open-mindedness and political commitment is all that is needed here. Melbourne would be a good place to trial electric/battery operated buses, but I don't think this will ever happen.
Interestingly there is a motorway, in Germany I think, where overhead wires power electric trucks.

[bendowson]

Correction: the pie chart you showed at 10:02 actually doesn't include the Carlingford line, which was the T6 line. The line you pointed out as having the lowest patronage is actually the Olympic Park line which is understandable as it is only used by those actually going to and from Olympic Park. However, the Carlingford line had only 569, 000 patrons in 2019, about 100, 000 less than the Olympic Park line and millions less that every other line. So your point still largely stands.

[SirGregory]

Two advantages of light rail:
1. Schedules are more reliable. Lot less anxiety for waiting passengers.
2. They accelerate and decelerate much more smoothly than buses. So much more comfortable.

[joc]

Enjoyed the video, subscribed and looking forward to more :) Just one point. You mentioned that Sydney's historic tram network was one of the world's largest. This is far from the case. At 291 route km, it was far shorter than say Glasgow's 329km or London's 528km. Manchester's combined network (it was run by different organisations because it was so big) was 689km and it directly connected to Liverpool and Blackburn's networks for a combined 976km of trams.

Then Paris had over a thousand km as did a few other American cities where you would fine the largest networks in the world, with Los Angeles topping it at 1500km or so. So while Sydney had the largest network in the Southern Hemisphere, that is a bit of a difference to the world.

[francesconicoletti]

I hope that one the parramatta metro is completed, they turn the tunnel boring machines around and drill the metro from Sydney city to the pacific beaches. While I have not yet used the light rail in the eastern suburbs, both its buses and its road system is a total mess, having a rail system joining the major parts of the eastern suburbs together would make the entire place more inviting.

[vonbon]

The Light Rail was in essence a corrupt scam with AU$3B laundered through a plethora of OS entities before being returned to the scams architect's in Australia.

So what did the Taxpayer get for AU$3B...?

A 14km piece of ground level track, and a train that runs at a speed less than a 1820s Sydney bullock cart, oh and despite the blistering 14km speed of these trains, the fleet shook itself cracked up and was grounded about a year after launch.

[pattygrinch]

Binging your vids man, love this stuff. Thank you

[williamchirgwin]

Hello, a good analysis of light rail comparing it to heavy rail and motor vehicle road use, summing it up well. Planning unfortunately is driven by politics and politicians, a failure in itself. An example of this was the overnight closure of the Sydney tram system in 1961, a terrible political decision. Thank you for covering this subject, enjoying your video.

[pabloguillen]

L2/L3 had 2.15M boardings in November 2022, that's 180k boarding per km of line. Sydney Metro had 1.396M or about 39k per km of line. The CSELR was way over budget. The Metro line in service was under budget, but the final cost per km of the metro line was still much larger than that for the CSELR. Which investment was more value for money? There is no public transport system in Australia, on rails or rubber, that moves more passengers per km than L2/L3. We need more light rail in inner city corridors.

[josephj]

The L2 tram line only needed a 1km extension east to Coogee and the L3 one needed to be extended to Maroubra Beach, Eastgardens and La Perouse to make them both better alternatives.

[bernardteuben]

love your channel. you might find the lack of heavy rail in Sydney eastern suburbs and northern beaches is due to the fact it was all trams in the day. may be a subject for a video..?