News & Discussion: Trams

[rubberman]

Someone mentioned before about the King William Street bridge over the River Torrens. I do recall reading an article somewhere that work needed to be done to the bridge so that it can handle the load of today's heavier trams - was about $10m to $20m worth of engineering works needed to be done to bring it up to standard.

The axle loads on the Flexities is about the same as an H car fully laden. So, it's a puzzle.

Isn't there more cars so more axles on the new trams? A single pressure point load is important but also the total load is important for a bridge.

A coupled set of H cars is plenty heavy and 8 axles. Plus, bridge design in those days, as today would have required the heaviest load combination available, so as many coupled sets of H cars as could fit on the bridge is likely. How can they fit anything heavier on now?

Look, I don't know. It's just really odd.

Put it another way. People often complain about how much politicians are paid. Were a Minister to question this oddity, and find that indeed the bridge, like those in Melbourne was designed to be stuffed full of trams, they'd have saved the taxpayer their full salary plus perks for one decision.

I'd say, let the engineers tell us why it was possible then, but not now?

[Haso]

I had a bit of time this morning... Seems to be going very well.

[Norman]

What Haso's pics and the ones below show is that the second set of rail lines has been laid down



Also, the centre of the crossing has been concreted in. Thanks for the tip-off to an old friend

[Tonsley213]

The axle loads on the Flexities is about the same as an H car fully laden. So, it's a puzzle.

Isn't there more cars so more axles on the new trams? A single pressure point load is important but also the total load is important for a bridge.

A coupled set of H cars is plenty heavy and 8 axles. Plus, bridge design in those days, as today would have required the heaviest load combination available, so as many coupled sets of H cars as could fit on the bridge is likely. How can they fit anything heavier on now?

Look, I don't know. It's just really odd.

Put it another way. People often complain about how much politicians are paid. Were a Minister to question this oddity, and find that indeed the bridge, like those in Melbourne was designed to be stuffed full of trams, they'd have saved the taxpayer their full salary plus perks for one decision.

I'd say, let the engineers tell us why it was possible then, but not now?

They may well have to bring the bridge up to modern standards. As is often the case when you modify something old and need it re certified.

[rubberman]

Isn't there more cars so more axles on the new trams? A single pressure point load is important but also the total load is important for a bridge.

A coupled set of H cars is plenty heavy and 8 axles. Plus, bridge design in those days, as today would have required the heaviest load combination available, so as many coupled sets of H cars as could fit on the bridge is likely. How can they fit anything heavier on now?

Look, I don't know. It's just really odd.

Put it another way. People often complain about how much politicians are paid. Were a Minister to question this oddity, and find that indeed the bridge, like those in Melbourne was designed to be stuffed full of trams, they'd have saved the taxpayer their full salary plus perks for one decision.

I'd say, let the engineers tell us why it was possible then, but not now?

They may well have to bring the bridge up to modern standards. As is often the case when you modify something old and need it re certified.

You'd like to think that having run trams 18 hours a day for 27 years, that if modern standards require an update, and thus expenditure of a few millions, then the experts ought to be heavily questioned, in detail. The whole point of scientific and engineering progress is to make things cheaper and better. Making something that was good for thirty odd years more expensive deserves a "Please explain!" at the very least.

One of the fundamental jobs of Parliament is to apply reality checks, and "Please explain!" requests to public policy.

Like I said, there may be a good reason. Fine. However, this just screams out for a whole lot of Parliamentary attention. If the Libs, and the Advertiser were to concentrate on things like this where millions are involved, rather than a few pissy hours when O-bahn buses have to take a different route, I'd say they were doing their job. That is, holding the government to account.

[Haso]

A coupled set of H cars is plenty heavy and 8 axles. Plus, bridge design in those days, as today would have required the heaviest load combination available, so as many coupled sets of H cars as could fit on the bridge is likely. How can they fit anything heavier on now?

Look, I don't know. It's just really odd.

Put it another way. People often complain about how much politicians are paid. Were a Minister to question this oddity, and find that indeed the bridge, like those in Melbourne was designed to be stuffed full of trams, they'd have saved the taxpayer their full salary plus perks for one decision.

I'd say, let the engineers tell us why it was possible then, but not now?

They may well have to bring the bridge up to modern standards. As is often the case when you modify something old and need it re certified.

You'd like to think that having run trams 18 hours a day for 27 years, that if modern standards require an update, and thus expenditure of a few millions, then the experts ought to be heavily questioned, in detail. The whole point of scientific and engineering progress is to make things cheaper and better. Making something that was good for thirty odd years more expensive deserves a "Please explain!" at the very least.

One of the fundamental jobs of Parliament is to apply reality checks, and "Please explain!" requests to public policy.

Like I said, there may be a good reason. Fine. However, this just screams out for a whole lot of Parliamentary attention. If the Libs, and the Advertiser were to concentrate on things like this where millions are involved, rather than a few pissy hours when O-bahn buses have to take a different route, I'd say they were doing their job. That is, holding the government to account.

There is another thing why is so important to check the bridge before any decision. Every bridge has its life span and this one is more than 87 years old. An average concrete bridge has a life span of 70 years… so it really does not matter what for is the bridge build 80 years ago if it is not in a good shape...
.

[The Scooter Guy]

I had a bit of time this morning... Seems to be going very well.

[rubberman]

They may well have to bring the bridge up to modern standards. As is often the case when you modify something old and need it re certified.

You'd like to think that having run trams 18 hours a day for 27 years, that if modern standards require an update, and thus expenditure of a few millions, then the experts ought to be heavily questioned, in detail. The whole point of scientific and engineering progress is to make things cheaper and better. Making something that was good for thirty odd years more expensive deserves a "Please explain!" at the very least.

One of the fundamental jobs of Parliament is to apply reality checks, and "Please explain!" requests to public policy.

Like I said, there may be a good reason. Fine. However, this just screams out for a whole lot of Parliamentary attention. If the Libs, and the Advertiser were to concentrate on things like this where millions are involved, rather than a few pissy hours when O-bahn buses have to take a different route, I'd say they were doing their job. That is, holding the government to account.

There is another thing why is so important to check the bridge before any decision. Every bridge has its life span and this one is more than 87 years old. An average concrete bridge has a life span of 70 years… so it really does not matter what for is the bridge build 80 years ago if it is not in a good shape...
.

But there's no suggestion that it is in bad shape. If so, then why isn't it being rebuilt anyway? Yes, by all means, if the bridge is unsafe, rebuild it. However, at the moment, apparently it's unsafe for trams but cars and buses are ok? Frankly, cars, trucks and buses have become heavier, but trams have not. Next, bridges may or may not have a life span of 70 years. That depends on a lot of things. If the concrete and steel has not corroded, the bridge may be better than the day it was built - concrete strength increases with age.

[Eurostar]

There are many SANFL games at Norwood Oval in a year, after games many fans want to head back to city, so would it be wise to have shortworking trams from Norwood Oval to City.

[Haso]

You'd like to think that having run trams 18 hours a day for 27 years, that if modern standards require an update, and thus expenditure of a few millions, then the experts ought to be heavily questioned, in detail. The whole point of scientific and engineering progress is to make things cheaper and better. Making something that was good for thirty odd years more expensive deserves a "Please explain!" at the very least.

One of the fundamental jobs of Parliament is to apply reality checks, and "Please explain!" requests to public policy.

Like I said, there may be a good reason. Fine. However, this just screams out for a whole lot of Parliamentary attention. If the Libs, and the Advertiser were to concentrate on things like this where millions are involved, rather than a few pissy hours when O-bahn buses have to take a different route, I'd say they were doing their job. That is, holding the government to account.

There is another thing why is so important to check the bridge before any decision. Every bridge has its life span and this one is more than 87 years old. An average concrete bridge has a life span of 70 years… so it really does not matter what for is the bridge build 80 years ago if it is not in a good shape...
.

But there's no suggestion that it is in bad shape. If so, then why isn't it being rebuilt anyway? Yes, by all means, if the bridge is unsafe, rebuild it. However, at the moment, apparently it's unsafe for trams but cars and buses are ok? Frankly, cars, trucks and buses have become heavier, but trams have not. Next, bridges may or may not have a life span of 70 years. That depends on a lot of things. If the concrete and steel has not corroded, the bridge may be better than the day it was built - concrete strength increases with age.

I do believe that some grape products going much, much better by ageing… with the concrete (products) there are so many variables and ifs…

No, I am not suggesting that this bridge is not in a good shape but there are some significant differences when rail/tram tracks are involved (again) in the bridge structure… having only road traffic is a bit simpler. I will stop here as I am not an engineer so I do not have enough knowledge to explain it a bit better. It will be nice if we have here some professional from this area to shed some light…

[Ser Noit of Loit]

DTPI bloke says the trams will be going from Glenelg to Victoria Square.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY7xfHMQv0M

I see now there's a crossover track just before the vic squre tram stop which would let them turn around and go back the other way.

[timtam20292]

DTPI bloke says the trams will be going from Glenelg to Victoria Square.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY7xfHMQv0M

I see now there's a crossover track just before the vic squre tram stop which would let them turn around and go back the other way.

That's whilst construction is happening, Victoria Square is as far as the trams can go right now.

[EBG]

Some more pictures from Friday 5/1/18. The square section in the very centre has been formed up and concreted in. All the new panel sections are numbered to make site easier. There were 2 mobile cranes lifting in more panels today.

[Ser Noit of Loit]

DTPI bloke says the trams will be going from Glenelg to Victoria Square.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY7xfHMQv0M

I see now there's a crossover track just before the vic squre tram stop which would let them turn around and go back the other way.

That's whilst construction is happening, Victoria Square is as far as the trams can go right now.

Yeah, I see now. I thought the whole line was shut down.

[PD2/20]

Yesterday morning the prefabricated panels N and W of square crossing had been installed. During the afternoon the 3 panels in K Wlm S of square were installed. The first 2 had the pointwork for the curves to/from N Tce. The third was a diamond crossing which is shown being lifted into position. Also during the afternoon lengths of grooved rail were laid out to form parts of the SW and NE curves and to fill the gaps between the square and pointwork panels.

K Wm Sth - Diamond Lift Past Pointwork Panels

2018-01-05_KWmSth_Diamond_Lift__AJC.JPG (524.33 KiB) Viewed 2642 times

K Wm Sth - Diamond Being Positioned

2018-01-05_KWmSth_Diamond_Positioned__AJC.JPG (538.02 KiB) Viewed 2642 times