News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[claybro]

Here is a subway proposal I have thought of. The subway would go south east from Ovingham to the Botanic Gardens then curve to head west under Grote or Flinders Street. Stations could possibly be around by Melbourne Street, East End, Town Hall.

Any underground route is determined by the deep foundation piles of high rise buildings. To that end apparently an underground easement already exists for this. It is basically a horseshoe loop from the existing station as far as Pultney street and back toward Victoria Square, then South West back toward Keswick. I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I have seen it posted here and elsewhere previously.

[OlympusAnt]

The whole network needs to be electrified and standardised long before a tunnel is even thought about

[Spotto]

Here is a subway proposal I have thought of. The subway would go south east from Ovingham to the Botanic Gardens then curve to head west under Grote or Flinders Street. Stations could possibly be around by Melbourne Street, East End, Town Hall.

Though it might be nice for the underground link to go through North Adelaide, the most realistic start of the link would be the Gaol triangle just before Adelaide Yard. A path underneath Adelaide Yard would lead directly from the Gawler tracks to the easement between the university medical buildings without crossing any other services. The Gaol triangle is already vacant land that's previously been used for construction, and working around the old signal cabin to preserve should be easy. Green is ground level and cuttings, red is underground.

Beyond that I don't know specifics but here's three options. The Red route would be dependant on what buildings are above but is probably similar to what we might get since Victoria Square seems to be popular and it gives easy access to the trams and City Connector bus, and helpfully connects to the Fringe but is still on the city side of East Terrace for the other 10 months of the year. The Yellow and Blue routes take a page out of Melbourne's book for their City Loop and Metro Tunnel and deep tunnel beneath the streets. Blue route goes via Victoria Square, Yellow route could follow either Pulteney or Frome to be slightly closer inside the city then Halifax to connect with the trams and support development in southern half of the CBD.

Any route will probably surface on the northern side of Anzac Highway so they can rejoin the Seaford tracks before the Anzac Highway bridge and stop at the Showground.

[SBD]

The whole network needs to be electrified and standardised long before a tunnel is even thought about

IF the North-South motorway and a train subway both require tunnel boring, and the same machine could be used for both, it would make sense to have the digging for the second one follow on from the first one, while the equipment is in Adelaide.

I suspect the road might need a bigger tunnel than the railway, so the equipment might not be suitable, even if the material being dug is the same.

[ChillyPhilly]

This is from Labor's Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan.

Spotto, your Red route has the correct entry. The gap between the University of Adelaide and UniSA medical buildings on North Terrace is indeed reserved for a future underground railway entrance.

[TorrensSA]

What I've heard is three underground city stations, one under North Tce (under the current station - Bank Street most likely) East End around Hindmarsh Square and one under Victoria Square. It's a 1km walk from Bank Street to Hindmarsh Square. A fourth station at Hutt Street would be nice. With three stations the tunnel would be about 4.5km - with four 6km, the two station option of Bank Street and Victoria Square would be 3.5km, this option is a waste in my opinion. I think the four stations is the best option. My stations would be Bank Street, Hindmarsh Square, Hutt Street (near Angas Street) and Central Market (with an exit into Victoria Square). The loop would take about 10mins from Adelaide Showground to Bank Street.

[Patrick_27]

Surely in terms of an underground station near ARS, the easiest solution is to have the underground portion parallel with the current platforms and via the same ticketing entry point at the station, When the InterContinental was built they obviously removed a platform for that building's footings but surely with existing technology they can work around that to make this work?

[TorrensSA]

The Bank Street Station would be accessed by Bank Street and ARS. You would need to make a hard left to make the underground line line up under the current ARS, having it diagonally under Bank Street with an entrance near Hindley Street and one that connects with the platforms at ARS. People would know that Bank Street and ARS are the same station - "Now arriving at Bank Street - change here for trains to Outer Harbor, Grange and Belair". It's like 200m between Hindley and ARS a platform would fit nicely underneath.

[PeFe]

The Adelaide underground tunnel proposal is a "U" shape and for good reason......"loops" add unnecessary time to train travel.

I estimate that if you catch a train "going the wrong way" on the Sydney city circle or the Melbourne city loop, it adds 10 minutes to your journey....not a great inducement to use public transport.

The latest additions to the Sydney and Melbourne train networks ignore the loop.....the Sydney Metro will be a "through" service adding new stations in the CBD, same with Melbourne, a "through" service with new stations.

[TorrensSA]

The underground line (and above ground section) is actually a loop, Adelaide Showground to Adelaide Showground via the underground stations and Mile End. But the underground city line, will be mainly used to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines, it can be used to loop Gawler to Gawler and Seaford to Seaford etc. So it is actually a loop, if it needs to be.

[SBD]

Surely in terms of an underground station near ARS, the easiest solution is to have the underground portion parallel with the current platforms and via the same ticketing entry point at the station, When the InterContinental was built they obviously removed a platform for that building's footings but surely with existing technology they can work around that to make this work?

I had imagined that the tunnel portal would be west of Morphett Street, leading to tunnels under North Terrace. I imagined they would be deep enough that platform access would be down from the existing subway under North Terrace. The platforms would be under North Terrace, parallel to the existing platforms, but I had not considered whether the east, middle or west end is directly below the pedestrian subway. I guess a direct pedestrian link between the current platform concourse and the northern underground platform is possible in addition, but pedestrian access to the southern platform would require a level change (over or under the northern line), unless the tracks are stacke).

[Spotto]

The underground line (and above ground section) is actually a loop, Adelaide Showground to Adelaide Showground via the underground stations and Mile End. But the underground city line, will be mainly used to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines, it can be used to loop Gawler to Gawler and Seaford to Seaford etc. So it is actually a loop, if it needs to be.

It may look like a loop from the sky but the most plausible configuration would only allow movement from north to south with no connections to let it be used like a traditional loop. In any case it definitely should NOT be a loop, look at Melbourne’s clogged loop. A link (above or below ground) that can only be used to connect north-south/east-west/diagonal/etc has a far longer usable lifespan before becoming strained than a traditional loop since increased frequency along an isolated link doesn’t impact other services. Look at Melbourne’s Metro Tunnel, Auckland’ City Rail Link, Perth and Brisbane’s networks.

[SBD]

The underground line (and above ground section) is actually a loop, Adelaide Showground to Adelaide Showground via the underground stations and Mile End. But the underground city line, will be mainly used to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines, it can be used to loop Gawler to Gawler and Seaford to Seaford etc. So it is actually a loop, if it needs to be.

It may look like a loop from the sky but the most plausible configuration would only allow movement from north to south with no connections to let it be used like a traditional loop. In any case it definitely should NOT be a loop, look at Melbourne’s clogged loop. A link (above or below ground) that can only be used to connect north-south/east-west/diagonal/etc has a far longer usable lifespan before becoming strained than a traditional loop since increased frequency along an isolated link doesn’t impact other services. Look at Melbourne’s Metro Tunnel, Auckland’ City Rail Link, Perth and Brisbane’s networks.

Adding the third side of a triangle would be reasonable if space permitted, even if it was not regularly used by scheduled services (it might be helpful for first and last services of the day to access the depot, for example). Would there be space? That might depend on whether the southern junction is near Sir Donald Bradman Drive (maybe) or Anzac Highway (probably not because of the cemetery).

[mattwinter]

The underground line (and above ground section) is actually a loop, Adelaide Showground to Adelaide Showground via the underground stations and Mile End. But the underground city line, will be mainly used to connect the Seaford and Gawler lines, it can be used to loop Gawler to Gawler and Seaford to Seaford etc. So it is actually a loop, if it needs to be.

It may look like a loop from the sky but the most plausible configuration would only allow movement from north to south with no connections to let it be used like a traditional loop. In any case it definitely should NOT be a loop, look at Melbourne’s clogged loop. A link (above or below ground) that can only be used to connect north-south/east-west/diagonal/etc has a far longer usable lifespan before becoming strained than a traditional loop since increased frequency along an isolated link doesn’t impact other services. Look at Melbourne’s Metro Tunnel, Auckland’ City Rail Link, Perth and Brisbane’s networks.

I'd certainly say rather than a loop it would better to just connect lines together. Seaford -> Gawler. Even Outer Harbour -> Belair as well. Easy. Trains can just run straight through the CBD.

Exactly where the underground stations ended up wouldn't be such a big deal. Realistically these stations end up having quite a few exits and span quite a decent area, so One at Hindmarsh Square, say, could pretty easily connect with Rundle Mall / Rundle Street and the East End. One at Bank Street or whatever could just be seen as an extension of the ARS...

[Goodsy]

How about this

Connect Gawler and Seaford with a U shaped tunnel, Connect Outer Harbor and Belair with a tunnel the length of Unley road.



Then ARS can be a terminus for regional/interstate trains.

Mile End station is closed, replaced with a tram service if it's needed