News & Discussion: Trams

[Llessur2002]

Did Downer's previous proposal state what sort of service they planned to run? Would it be a stopping service (albeit only three stops) as per the other tram routes with fares in line with the rest of the Adelaide Metro system or would it be an entirely private line solely for airport transfers (with usual airport-level fares around $20-30 or so) that just happens to link in with the rest of the tram system for access to the CBD?

That, to me, would be a big driver of which route would be best - if it's the latter and no incidental uplift to the chosen corridor is intended then why bother with HBR or SDB when there is potentially a direct route via Keswick Drain? If it's the former then it would be stupid to consider the drain as an option.

To be honest, as much a I love the idea of an extended tram system, I'd definitely not be supportive of a higher-priced airport-only service along either SDB or HBR - it would be such a shame to preclude the use of these corridors for new transport systems that do provide an economic uplift for the local area for an airport service that is already adequately served by a bus. If the State Government does allow private investment in the network then it should be on the provision that fares and ticketing technology are aligned with the broader Adelaide Metro system, and that adequate numbers of stops are put in to allow the use of the line by the general public and commuters (obviously that doesn't prevent them from running separate express services to the airport).

[claybro]

Did Downer's previous proposal state what sort of service they planned to run? Would it be a stopping service (albeit only three stops) as per the other tram routes with fares in line with the rest of the Adelaide Metro system or would it be an entirely private line solely for airport transfers (with usual airport-level fares around $20-30 or so) that just happens to link in with the rest of the tram system for access to the CBD?

That, to me, would be a big driver of which route would be best - if it's the latter and no incidental uplift to the chosen corridor is intended then why bother with HBR or SDB when there is potentially a direct route via Keswick Drain? If it's the former then it would be stupid to consider the drain as an option.

To be honest, as much a I love the idea of an extended tram system, I'd definitely not be supportive of a higher-priced airport-only service along either SDB or HBR - it would be such a shame to preclude the use of these corridors for new transport systems that do provide an economic uplift for the local area for an airport service that is already adequately served by a bus. If the State Government does allow private investment in the network then it should be on the provision that fares and ticketing technology are aligned with the broader Adelaide Metro system, and that adequate numbers of stops are put in to allow the use of the line by the general public and commuters (obviously that doesn't prevent them from running separate express services to the airport).

The sketchy information provided so far clearly indicates it is intended to be limited stops. Going by what happens at other airports with rail connection, intermediate stops used by local commuters are charged at normal fares, whilst those boarding at the airport attract a higher charge. As others have mentioned here, the dis incentive in Adelaide to use PT from the airport to the city is the short distance and therefore the low cost of taxi/uber fares. 2 or more tourists travelling together really negates any saving using PT. It should really be looked at as an urban renewal project, with the added benefit of airport access rather than the other way around.

[Will409]

In a bit of a change of discussion away from the extensions for a moment, Lord Mayor Martin Hease has suggested a heritage tram service using some of the surviving H type trams be introduced on Sundays as a heritage/tourist operation. The Advertiser had an article about it yesterday (available here behind a paywall - https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenge ... 94546e46d1)

On behalf of the Tramway Museum, St Kilda, I was interviewed on ABC Radio yesterday afternoon about this proposal. Jump to 17:30 for the interview (http://www.abc.net.au/radio/adelaide/pr ... s/10216010).

[adelaide transport]

Unfortunately there is nowhere to stable them at Glengowrie as depot is full with 24 trams.

[Ho Really]

You raised an interesting point in your reply Ho. And thanks for the maps BTW. If a Keswick creek had to be on raised track because of the drain, you would then need to wall in the backyards of every house along the creek through Richmond/Cowandilla to prevent loss of privacy of those properties. I would imagine those along that stretch would seek some compensation for their loss of amenity, and maybe some loss of land due to large footings etc. Parts of the creek reserve, while wide enough for laying of standard tracks, digging large foundations to support a raised track system is another point entirely. From you map, it would appear the most direct route is the SBD route straight along Grote street to Vic Square to join the existing CBD track.

I also think privacy is the biggest issue along the Keswick Creek. The noise can be canceled or kept to a minimum. There are many types of materials that can be used to suppress noise. Rolling stock and tracks (of varying types) can also limit noise.

Raising the track above the drain will probably require stronger footings. My idea was putting a raised cover over the drain.

Another option that I didn't mention, would be to lower the track into the drain itself. Possibly digging a few metres below the bed of the drain to enclose the track. This will also allow grade separation when intersecting roads. If this option is considered the drain itself would have to be either eliminated completely, diverted or lowered under the track. If the drain goes underneath the track it will be much lower than at present. Water coming from upstream will be gravity fed into pipes (or culvert) running under the track until it reaches the Airport where the water is stored in underground reservoirs. From there it can be pumped back to the surface or into other drains via solar powered pumps. The water then can be used to irrigate the Airport surrounds. I also think the underground reservoirs will help mitigate any flooding at the Airport should there be a 1-in-a-100 year flood event. Two infrastructure works combined into one major project.

There’s one more interesting option. In China they've tested trams that require no tracks. See the article: Are trackless trams a game changer? by the Property Council of Australia. Called Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART) it runs on rubber tyres, is guided by magnetic strips in the road and powered by lithium-ion batteries. So no need for overhead wires and rails. An interesting proposition should Adelaide be interested. Both Perth and Hobart are looking at this technology. This could be a game changer, as they say. I personally think they could expand this to be powered by an induction system which will give the tram continuous power instead of recharging at stops (as planned), unless of course the induction system interferes with the magnetic guidance on the road surface.

Cheers

[rubberman]

You raised an interesting point in your reply Ho. And thanks for the maps BTW. If a Keswick creek had to be on raised track because of the drain, you would then need to wall in the backyards of every house along the creek through Richmond/Cowandilla to prevent loss of privacy of those properties. I would imagine those along that stretch would seek some compensation for their loss of amenity, and maybe some loss of land due to large footings etc. Parts of the creek reserve, while wide enough for laying of standard tracks, digging large foundations to support a raised track system is another point entirely. From you map, it would appear the most direct route is the SBD route straight along Grote street to Vic Square to join the existing CBD track.

I also think privacy is the biggest issue along the Keswick Creek. The noise can be canceled or kept to a minimum. There are many types of materials that can be used to suppress noise. Rolling stock and tracks (of varying types) can also limit noise.

Raising the track above the drain will probably require stronger footings. My idea was putting a raised cover over the drain.

Another option that I didn't mention, would be to lower the track into the drain itself. Possibly digging a few metres below the bed of the drain to enclose the track. This will also allow grade separation when intersecting roads. If this option is considered the drain itself would have to be either eliminated completely, diverted or lowered under the track. If the drain goes underneath the track it will be much lower than at present. Water coming from upstream will be gravity fed into pipes (or culvert) running under the track until it reaches the Airport where the water is stored in underground reservoirs. From there it can be pumped back to the surface or into other drains via solar powered pumps. The water then can be used to irrigate the Airport surrounds. I also think the underground reservoirs will help mitigate any flooding at the Airport should there be a 1-in-a-100 year flood event. Two infrastructure works combined into one major project.

There’s one more interesting option. In China they've tested trams that require no tracks. See the article: Are trackless trams a game changer? by the Property Council of Australia. Called Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART) it runs on rubber tyres, is guided by magnetic strips in the road and powered by lithium-ion batteries. So no need for overhead wires and rails. An interesting proposition should Adelaide be interested. Both Perth and Hobart are looking at this technology. This could be a game changer, as they say. I personally think they could expand this to be powered by an induction system which will give the tram continuous power instead of recharging at stops (as planned), unless of course the induction system interferes with the magnetic guidance on the road surface.

Cheers

Trackless trams. They are called buses.

[rubberman]

I noticed today a tram doing a South Terrace shuttle run. Anyone know the reason?

[adelaide transport]

City to Bay Fun Run meant City closed down for a time this morning. Special high frequency timetable operated from Brighton Road from early morning till 2pm.

[timtam20292]

Dear Stakeholder

The Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) would like to notify you of speed and lane restrictions required for profiling and asphalting works at the intersection of King William Road and North Terrace, as part of the City Tram Extension.

Traffic will be restricted at the south east corner of the King William Road and North Terrace intersection to allow appropriate drying time for asphalting works, between 1am Saturday 22 September and 6:30am Sunday 23 September.

Traffic will be maintained in all directions through the intersection, with signage and traffic management in place to advise motorists of changed conditions. Speed and lane restrictions will be in place in the vicinity of the works. Tram services will not be affected during these works.

Access to businesses and properties will be maintained.

Thank you for your continued patience and ongoing interest in the City Tram Extension Project whilst testing continues.

For more information on the City Tram Extension Project please visit www.citytramextension.sa.gov.au, call the enquiry line on 1300 030 919 or email [email protected].

Regards

Stakeholder and Community Engagement Team

[The Scooter Guy]

Dear Stakeholder

The Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) would like to notify you of speed and lane restrictions required for profiling and asphalting works at the intersection of King William Road and North Terrace, as part of the City Tram Extension.

Traffic will be restricted at the south east corner of the King William Road and North Terrace intersection to allow appropriate drying time for asphalting works, between 1am Saturday 22 September and 6:30am Sunday 23 September.

Traffic will be maintained in all directions through the intersection, with signage and traffic management in place to advise motorists of changed conditions. Speed and lane restrictions will be in place in the vicinity of the works. Tram services will not be affected during these works.

Access to businesses and properties will be maintained.

Thank you for your continued patience and ongoing interest in the City Tram Extension Project whilst testing continues.

For more information on the City Tram Extension Project please visit www.citytramextension.sa.gov.au, call the enquiry line on 1300 030 919 or email [email protected].

Regards

Stakeholder and Community Engagement Team

One step closer to opening!

[1NEEDS2POST]

On the south-west side of the King William St/North Tce intersection, the lines that vehicles are meant to stop behind have been covered with a new layer of road. This creates a huge problem for the tram. If you look at the tram track that turns left into North Tce, it cuts the corner. That's why the stopping lines were staggered. Now the lines are covered, occasionally cars will stop beyond where they are supposed to stop.

I sat on the tram for two cycles at that intersection because cars were blocking the track. A bus could have easily driven around them. This is one reason why trams were ripped out in the 1950s.

[Goodsy]

A bus could have easily driven around them. This is one reason why trams were ripped out in the 1950s.

that's a bit of a stretch

[ozisnowman]

Install cameras and fine them heavily they will quickly learn to avoid queuing over the lines

[Waewick]

Install cameras and fine them heavily they will quickly learn to avoid queuing over the lines

Surely they can be put on the front of a tram.

Agree with the heavy fines.

[Llessur2002]

Sounds like a very temporary problem where the new asphalt has been laid but the lines have not yet been marked. It's probably resolved already. Not a big deal.