News & Discussion: O-Bahn

[monotonehell]

Thank you
And no I'm not wrong

Ignorance is the same as wrong. Especially willful ignorance.

[citywatcher]

And what of arrogance?
We'll just agree to disagree mate let's leave it at that.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[monotonehell]

And what of arrogance?
We'll just agree to disagree mate let's leave it at that.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

I don't agree

[SouthAussie94]

The O'Bahns biggest problem is the shear amount of buses needed about 40 an hour in peak, which would mean 2000 seated passengers, in contrast the Seaford line has 9 services through major stations in peak hour, which would equal the same 2000 seated passengers, this could easily double with 6 carriage trains (platform extension is need). The O'Bahn would work better as a hybrid light rail, long tram vehicles with 150 seats and high top speed, 15 to 20 services an hour, these could link into the Glenelg and Outer Harbor lines, Example out of peak O'Bahn would get 12 services an hour, Glenelg 6, Outer Harbor 3 / Port Adelaide (Semaphore) terminating 2, West Lakes 4, Grange 3. Mix in the new long and current shorter trams, it's a better option then having 40 to 60 buses floating around in peak hour.

How does someone living in Redwood Park catch this hypothetical tram/train?

They have two options:
1. Drive to TTP. This causes congestion on local roads. Congestion means their travel time takes longer. Their car then needs to be parked somewhere. More carparks needed at TTP. This person is already in their car, why don't they just drive all the way to the city?

2. Catch a bus from Redwood Park to TTP. They need to walk from their house to the bus stop. They wait for the bus. The bus takes them to TTP. They wait for the tram/train. This involves extra waiting time. As numerous others have said previously, if people need to transfer services, the perceived inconvenience makes them more likely to use private vehicles.

Currently this person in Redwood Park can catch a bus a short distance from their house, stay on this bus all the way to the city. They arrive at their destination in the city.

Why don't we keep the O-Bahn, but also build a train, a tram and a Modbury Freeway along the O-Bahn corridor? That way, all commuters living in the NE suburbs will be able to take their prefered method of transport. Win Win!

The buses have to leave the track at modbury so in effect they are already feeder services

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

No, the buses are the same service, even when they leave the track at Modbury.

Feeder services - Definition: Transportation operations in which cargoes are shipped by water in smaller vessels to/from a load-center port for loading to or unloading from larger ocean-going vessels.

Definition is technically for cargo, but still holds true for passengers.

It's a feeder service if you need to change vehicles. The O-Bahn takes passengers door-door.

A train or tram would require feeder services. Door-Interchange-Door. This transfer takes time. Even if it were to happen instantaneously, there is still the perception of lost time, with this having the effect of people likelihood of using the service.

[claybro]

I have to put my hand up and say I am not a fan of Obahn, but understand the usefulness and relative lower cost. MY main objection is the quality of the ride and noise levels as compared to light rail, however much of the argument here, seems focused on capacity and one seat door to door rides. With this in mind, is there any figures relating to the percentage of commuters using the Obahn as park and ride, or from connecting services to various stations? (I may have missed this in the heat of this thread). If a larger percentage of patrons are using the service from connections or driving to their nearest station, then it sort of negates the door to door benefit.

[PeFe]

It is disappointing seeing the number pf people who choose to drive to an O-Bahn interchange and park, instead of taking their one-seat bus ride....maybe its time for the SA government/local councils to start charging at these car parks.
Also the total lack of development around the interchanges is a big fail (nothing to do with the O-Bahn as such)
It is sad to hear objections against a 4 storey apartment next to the Paradise Interchange, locals complaining about the expected increase of car traffic.....the concept of transport-orientated development is obviously lost on them.
How many people live within a 10 minute walk of an O-Bahn interchange? 500? 1000? Not nearly enough......
Tea Tree Plaza could be a (smaller and more downmarket) version of Chatswood if the local council/SA government got their act together.

[monotonehell]

IMO when you have a large amount of people using a park and ride, your PT system is failing. Park and ride is still needed for those who services can't get to for whatever reason. The truth is that a LOT of Golden Grove and surrounding suburbs are near impossible to get a bus service through due to the winding dead end street lay out. The routes that exist have to skirt around the edges on the main roads. So this generates a lot of park and ride custom. Having said that - it's nice that people chose park and ride over driving all the way.

As to the smoothness (or lack of) of the ride. There's a hypothesis that the 30 odd year use of the track by the original models of vehicles wore a groove in a place specific to their tyre position. And now that we have slightly different tyre positions with the new vehicles, this is causing vibrations as the tyres run over the old ruts laterally. AFAIK there's no confirmation of this. But if true then maybe the O-Bahn (just the track or the whole system) will need replacing soon after all.

[Westside]

This thread is fast becoming my favourite soap opera.

For anyone who has missed some of the facts and arguments in this thread so far, the following clip should bring you up to speed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

[monotonehell]

This thread is fast becoming my favourite soap opera.

For anyone who has missed some of the facts and arguments in this thread so far, the following clip should bring you up to speed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

I knew what it was going to be, but I clicked it anyway.

In fact I would have been disappointed if it wasn't. Love that song.

[citywatcher]

One thing I think is desperately needed at the interchanges is multi storey car parks. Paradise especially the spread of cars parked on the main road and a park and ride 200 metres from the buses. But the residents will howl.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[Norman]

An extension south was proposed while back but ultimately rejected

Pretty sure that was never a serious proposal. I only heard a mention of it once in the paper, might have been an election promise.

A southern O-Bahn would not be beneficial down south as the area already has a good heavy rail system, and the suburbs have grown around that. The O-Bahn was a greenfields infrastructure project.

And no I'm not wrong

Interesting attitude for a debate without giving any facts or evidence on why you're not wrong.

There really is no point in going on with a debate unless you provide some new information backed up by evidence.

[citywatcher]

An extension south was proposed while back but ultimately rejected

Oh the irony of the second paragraph

And no I'm not wrong

Interesting attitude for a debate without giving any facts or evidence on why you're not wrong.

There really is no point in going on with a debate unless you provide some new information backed up by evidence.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[monotonehell]

An extension south was proposed while back but ultimately rejected

Pretty sure that was never a serious proposal. I only heard a mention of it once in the paper, might have been an election promise.

A southern O-Bahn would not be beneficial down south as the area already has a good heavy rail system, and the suburbs have grown around that. The O-Bahn was a greenfields infrastructure project.

Depends on what you regard as "serious" I suppose.

It was a State Liberal proposal at the time. They got it to quite a serious level. The plan was to run an O-Bahn track down the sides of the existing rail corridor but not to duplicate the rail services, it was meant to be fed from the <outer-inner>* suburbs in a similar way that the N.E. Busway does.

However it was soon realised that without grade separation, the speed advantage would be lost. With grade separation, it was interesting idea to get <outer-inner>* suburban buses off South Road and retain one-seat rides. That is instead of a short bus route transferring onto a short train ride. But ultimately not workable.


* I need a real word for suburbs which are not inner city suburbs, but also not far flung suburbs... medium-distanced?

[adelaide transport]

Guys it is all very interesting the discussion re the benefits or otherwise of Light Rail versus Heavy rail,but at the risk of disappointing some of you-it ain't going to happen. The Government is not spending all this money on things like the new O-Bahn tunnel,and other things to see it being redundant in a few years time if they were going to invest in some form of rail.
As has been mentioned many times the present O-Bahn is not currently suitable for conversion due to low bridges,soil instability due to River Torrens and soil. No Government irrespective of whichever party is in power isn't going to spend a lot of money replacing the existing track for rail. Considering the mess this Government is in and the costs-it would be prohibitive.
The best that you can hope for is slow and gradual replacement of the concrete track in sections.
Whilst the fleet of Scania rigids and Artics is not perfect, the Government is not about to dice them.
The present system generally works very well and hopefully by the end of this year it will be even better with faster services and with time savings it will enable them to put in more services on to peak hour journeys.
it is unfortunate that the O-Bahn is limited to Light City Buses. Services that previously ran on the O-Bahn (by Torrens Transit) like services from Athelstone and Rostrevor should have been allowed to continue even if Light City Buses were allowed to operate. DTPI should consider what is best for the passengers,not what suits them or the operator.

[timtam20292]

I side with Norman.