News & Discussion: Trams

[rubberman]

Ok.

Sydney is putting in that wire free technology for a distance that is roughly the length of King William Street.

That increased the cost by roughly $600 million. (That also included lengthening stops, but that would hardly account for a few million).

Don't take my word for it, look it up.

If you want to kill tram extensions in Adelaide, that would be a great way to do it. So $600m for King William Street + $600m for the Parade + $600m for Prospect Road +$600m for O'Connell St. And that's EXTRA over the rest of the cost.

Not to mention that Sydney will forever be giving the makers of that technology an advantage in tendering for tram replacements. How much will that cost?

However, if those who want to go for the wire free look were to volunteer to pay extra for the privilege....

[EBG]

The Sydney wire free systems sounds like the APS system used in Bordeaux France. Here trams run both off overhead wires and then on a third rail section which consists of sections roughly the same length as a tram separated by insulated sections. Each conductor section only becomes live when the tram is actually on top of that section. In Europe the APS system is known by the nick name the Astronomically Priced System.

[Ho Really]

...except for the wire free issue. It is wildly more expensive, so that even if it were marginally economic to put trams down the Parade, wire free technology would tip it way into the uneconomic zone. Furthermore, if you look at their claims, they gloss over what happens when these systems get wet...as in rain...

Claims that catenary-free systems are wildly more expensive are exaggerated as is loss of performance in rain. I think you may have to do more research on this. In the long run catenary-free systems work out to be cheaper. Besides you don't have to have the whole network catenary-free if that is what you wish. The Parade is a perfect place for this system and should be considered.

Check systems by:
Ansaldo STS TramWave System
Alstom Transportation Aesthetic Power Supply (APS) System
Bombardier Primove System
Kinkisharyo e-Brid System

If you want to kill tram extensions in Adelaide, that would be a greaSt way to do it. So $600m for King William Street + $600m for the Parade + $600m for Prospect Road +$600m for O'Connell St. And that's EXTRA over the rest of the cost.

It's not extra over the rest of the cost. You are not doubling up. As for maintenance, overhead systems need the same amount of work and in some cases more. If you take into consideration climate-change. I would rather have a system in place where I will not get a live wire crashing on me in a wild storm. The other advantage is headroom (or air draft) that will allow access to cranes and other construction vehicles on roads and not to speak of the fire brigade and double decker buses.

So you need to look at the advantages before yelling out the costs.

Cheers

[rubberman]

...except for the wire free issue. It is wildly more expensive, so that even if it were marginally economic to put trams down the Parade, wire free technology would tip it way into the uneconomic zone. Furthermore, if you look at their claims, they gloss over what happens when these systems get wet...as in rain...

Claims that catenary-free systems are wildly more expensive are exaggerated as is loss of performance in rain. I think you may have to do more research on this. In the long run catenary-free systems work out to be cheaper. Besides you don't have to have the whole network catenary-free if that is what you wish. The Parade is a perfect place for this system and should be considered.

Check systems by:
Ansaldo STS TramWave System
Alstom Transportation Aesthetic Power Supply (APS) System
Bombardier Primove System
Kinkisharyo e-Brid System

If you want to kill tram extensions in Adelaide, that would be a greaSt way to do it. So $600m for King William Street + $600m for the Parade + $600m for Prospect Road +$600m for O'Connell St. And that's EXTRA over the rest of the cost.

It's not extra over the rest of the cost. You are not doubling up. As for maintenance, overhead systems need the same amount of work and in some cases more. If you take into consideration climate-change. I would rather have a system in place where I will not get a live wire crashing on me in a wild storm. The other advantage is headroom (or air draft) that will allow access to cranes and other construction vehicles on roads and not to speak of the fire brigade and double decker buses.

So you need to look at the advantages before yelling out the costs.

Cheers

The Sydney system added about $600m for going wire free for roughly the length of King William Street. That's a current project using the latest wire free technology. So, how did Sydney get it so wrong, if you are correct?

If you have figures for systems that are the same or similar for wire free technology, give us a link.

I have no doubt that one day, such systems will be as cheap as overhead wire. When that happens, I have no problem with them. It is just that I am not aware of any wire free system in the world at present that comes anywhere near the cost of overhead wire.

I'm not too fussed though. There's no money even for planning these routes in Adelaide for this financial year. It would take three or four years to plan any extensions down the Parade or Prospect road, get approvals, get funding etc etc. Then, of course there is the usual dithering and delay in negotiating and letting contracts. So, even if things started early in the next financial year, in July 2016, we wouldn't see anything start before 2020. By which time the Sydney experiment will be well under way. IF it works, and IF there's no problem with wet weather performance, and IF it doesn't blow out in cost, and IF there are no teething problems, and IF the cost comes down to somewhere near overhead wire cost, then you may get your wish.

[Ho Really]

The Sydney system added about $600m for going wire free for roughly the length of King William Street. That's a current project using the latest wire free technology. So, how did Sydney get it so wrong, if you are correct?

If you have figures for systems that are the same or similar for wire free technology, give us a link.

I don't know how they worked out the cost in Sydney, least of all what is included in that project. I also don't have figures for you. All I can quote is what the manufacturers state in their literature, etc. And as I said before, the wire-free system is for the long.

I'm not too fussed though. There's no money even for planning these routes in Adelaide for this financial year. It would take three or four years to plan any extensions down the Parade or Prospect road, get approvals, get funding etc etc. Then, of course there is the usual dithering and delay in negotiating and letting contracts. So, even if things started early in the next financial year, in July 2016, we wouldn't see anything start before 2020. By which time the Sydney experiment will be well under way. IF it works, and IF there's no problem with wet weather performance, and IF it doesn't blow out in cost, and IF there are no teething problems, and IF the cost comes down to somewhere near overhead wire cost, then you may get your wish.

Funding is the first hurdle with any project. If there isn't any there's no use talking about it, but just dream.

Cheers

[MessiahAndrw]

The council last week agreed to spend $200,000 creating a plan

What actually goes into creating such plans? I've seen people on sites like these come up with incredibly detailed hobby plans in their spare time. What are we paying for that is worth $200,000?

[MessiahAndrw]

The Sydney system added about $600m for going wire free for roughly the length of King William Street.

How much of this is grift? Let's say it costs $10 million in materials and labour to install a 3rd rail, where's the other $590 million going?

[AG]

The council last week agreed to spend $200,000 creating a plan

What actually goes into creating such plans? I've seen people on sites like these come up with incredibly detailed hobby plans in their spare time. What are we paying for that is worth $200,000?

Fees to consultants (advisory, planning and engineering) for reports and concept plans.

[rubberman]

The Sydney system added about $600m for going wire free for roughly the length of King William Street.

How much of this is grift? Let's say it costs $10 million in materials and labour to install a 3rd rail, where's the other $590 million going?

My guess is that most of it is grift, with fat profits going to the constructing consortia and "facilitating fees" going to the banksters. The point is that unless we get back into control as purchasers of these projects, then they either won't happen, or they will end up being token systems.

So, for example, in Sydney, instead of getting a 40 km system serving multiple destinations in the eastern suburbs for the price, they got a token line out to Randwick.

If we want a system here, we need to insist on a fairly priced one, and hold out until we get that fair price.

[Vee]

Item from the Canberra Times on the Capital's 25 Year plan for extending light rail infrastructure.

Woden and Parliament next for light rail lines in Canberra tram master plan

Canberrans will get their first look at a new 25-year master plan for tram services on Monday, showing a map of future routes that can connect with the $783 million city to Gungahlin line, due to be operational by 2019 or 2020.

...

Tram lines will be built as "leading infrastructure", with development corridors chosen in line with future need and to promote higher density. The plan highlights the findings of Infrastructure Australia's May 2015 audit report which showed the cost of road congestion would increase from $208 million per year to $703 million by 2031.

Planning Minister Mick Gentleman said Canberra's population would grow to more than 500,000 by 2041, leaving the city's nation leading car dependency unviable for a modern city.

...

"Light rail is integral to ACT government's planning, transport, climate change and health strategies for the future," Mr Gentleman said.
"Light rail benefits include reducing congestion on our roads and greenhouse gas emissions".

Canberra Times:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... kgvdw.html

[Norman]

There are a few reports regarding the North-West rail corridor here: http://transportplan.sa.gov.au/technical_documents

They compare several options, including keeping heavy rail on the line and taking the tram down Port Road instead, and several other combinations. They go into a lot of detail.

[claybro]

the state government loves reports and plans and glossy brochures, to the point, once there are so many options on the table, no one will make a decision, and it goes on the never never basket. I had the please of staying recently in the st Kilda area of Melbourne, and their conversion of the once heavy rail( poorly patronised) to light rail is working well, with a much larger population density than our OH corridor. The comparison is almost identical in scale. Seems a no brainer to me to convert OH to light rail, but the speed of our trams is a problem. They actually travel at quite a speed in Melbourne, even in the city centre, unlike our walking pace tram service in Adelaide for no apparent reason.

[jk1237]

the state government loves reports and plans and glossy brochures, to the point, once there are so many options on the table, no one will make a decision, and it goes on the never never basket. I had the please of staying recently in the st Kilda area of Melbourne, and their conversion of the once heavy rail( poorly patronised) to light rail is working well, with a much larger population density than our OH corridor. The comparison is almost identical in scale. Seems a no brainer to me to convert OH to light rail, but the speed of our trams is a problem. They actually travel at quite a speed in Melbourne, even in the city centre, unlike our walking pace tram service in Adelaide for no apparent reason.

There were virtually no high rise apartments in Southbank, South Melbourne and St Kilda when it was the old train line with very old trains, now its a much different story, and the line travels through St Kilda rather than stopping on the edge so yes the Melb situation is a no brainer, however our Outer Harbor line is a much different set up and would be 3 times longer than the St Kilda line. I suggest keep it as heavy rail, electrify it and have 2 car trains every 15 mins, that can be double up for special events and peak hour (like the Freo line in Perth)

You are quite correct about how excruciatingly slow our trams are through the city. Its dumb

[Nathan]

I only had a quick skim, but one thing that stuck out is just for the section between the Entertainment Centre and Adelaide Railway Station, the tram takes 8-10 minutes longer. Given the amount of spend to trim just a few minutes on the O-Bahn, this seems like a big concession to make.

[Norman]

I only had a quick skim, but one thing that stuck out is just for the section between the Entertainment Centre and Adelaide Railway Station, the tram takes 8-10 minutes longer. Given the amount of spend to trim just a few minutes on the O-Bahn, this seems like a big concession to make.

This is true, but the argument made against that is that the person would then be right at their workplace instead of the outer rim of the CBD. Of course, the report then considers the fact that the lines could be sent through the CBD tunnel and link with the Belair line.

It's a really interesting report, I recommend reading the entire thing.