Stanwell Park Tunnel REF - Transport for NSW - NSW Government
Stanwell Park Tunnel REF - Transport for NSW - NSW Government
Stanwell Park Tunnel REF - Transport for NSW - NSW Government
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
• The hinged mast can be installed using a hinge mechanism, which removes the need <strong>for</strong><br />
large cranes.<br />
• The installation of a walk-in equipment hut would use more space and be more expensive.<br />
The use of outdoor cabinets was the most suitable solution given the limited space, cost<br />
and minimisation of environmental impacts.<br />
Alternative sites further north and further south were examined but were rejected due to the<br />
following reasons:<br />
• Installing poles/masts further north or south would create a gap in coverage to the leaky<br />
feeders within the tunnel portal.<br />
3.6 Justification of the Preferred Option<br />
It was decided to construct a DBS approximately 360 metres west of <strong>Stanwell</strong> <strong>Park</strong> station<br />
using GSM-R technology because it will enable the site to be consistent with the whole DTRS<br />
network. Consistent technology choice will enable Tf<strong>NSW</strong> to improve its existing quality of<br />
service, reliability and emergency responsiveness.<br />
The <strong>Stanwell</strong> <strong>Park</strong> <strong>Tunnel</strong> Location 1 site was selected due to its ability to cover the section of<br />
track between the east end portal of <strong>Stanwell</strong> <strong>Park</strong> <strong>Tunnel</strong> to <strong>Stanwell</strong> <strong>Park</strong> and Location 2 was<br />
selected <strong>for</strong> its ability to cover the section of track between the west end portal of the tunnel to<br />
Tree Tops. The proposed antenna height of 10 metres at Location 1 and nine metres at<br />
Location 2 is the minimum height required to provide optimum radio frequency coverage <strong>for</strong><br />
these sections of track.<br />
The proposed site has good construction and maintenance access. The proposed work will not<br />
require the removal of native vegetation.<br />
In summary, a higher pole, or an additional DTRS facility would be required if the site was to be<br />
relocated. It was decided that the preferred option would offer the least impact on the local<br />
environment while still meeting operational requirements.<br />
Page 30 of 72