News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[1NEEDS2POST]

There's also a crossing in Bonython Park that has been built but not turned on. It's been that way for a long time, maybe since the Torrens Rail Junction Project. That one has a fence or gate across it blocking access though.

[Eurostar]

There's also a crossing in Bonython Park that has been built but not turned on. It's been that way for a long time, maybe since the Torrens Rail Junction Project. That one has a fence or gate across it blocking access though.

Its foolish having ground level pedestrian crossing there. There should be pedestrian bridge or underpass. Many pedestrian crossings should go and be replaced by grade separated crossings.

[Nathan]

Sadly, the cyclist has now passed away. And there's been absolutely zero activity at the crossing in the month since to get it operational.

[ChillyPhilly]

It needs to be replaced with a bridge.

[Jacob_ULG3]

So out of pure curiosity.

If the outer harbour line was to be electrified.

- Would the Torrens bridge stay and use a different clearance of Overhead structures, or

- Would it be modified according to similar approaches like the Goodwood underpass and the king st pedestrian bridge, or

- Would it have to be removed entirely for the clearance to work?

Any thoughts? now that the Gawler Line is done.

I've added a pic of the bridge in question

[rubberman]

So out of pure curiosity.

If the outer harbour line was to be electrified.

- Would the Torrens bridge stay and use a different clearance of Overhead structures, or

- Would it be modified according to similar approaches like the Goodwood underpass and the king st pedestrian bridge, or

- Would it have to be removed entirely for the clearance to work?

Any thoughts? now that the Gawler Line is done.

I've added a pic of the bridge in question

A few thoughts. Given that the pantograph collector flexes, it might be possible that electric trains could still get under the existing structure. Possibly at reduced speed.

Then, there's the question of the age of the bridge and its condition. At some point, it will need replacement. When that happens, provision of overhead is feasible.

Of course, while heavy rail fans would like to see the Outer Harbor line electrified, I'm not sure why that would have a high priority. Given the amount already spent on that line and on heavy rail generally, and the numbers of passengers, I reckon light rail extensions to Prospect, Henley Beach, Unley etc have a bigger priority.

So, when the bridge needs upgrading is probably a good time to allow for a long term electrification.

[Llessur2002]

Sadly, the cyclist has now passed away. And there's been absolutely zero activity at the crossing in the month since to get it operational.

When they installed the new crossings adjacent Croydon Station they had 24/7 traffic controllers staffing them - they were there for months until they were activated. I would have thought that might be the least they could do until this arguably more dangerous crossing is switched on. Why it's taking so long is beyond me, although I suspect it will be signalling-related.

[ChillyPhilly]

So out of pure curiosity.

If the outer harbour line was to be electrified.

- Would the Torrens bridge stay and use a different clearance of Overhead structures, or

- Would it be modified according to similar approaches like the Goodwood underpass and the king st pedestrian bridge, or

- Would it have to be removed entirely for the clearance to work?

Any thoughts? now that the Gawler Line is done.

I've added a pic of the bridge in question

A few thoughts. Given that the pantograph collector flexes, it might be possible that electric trains could still get under the existing structure. Possibly at reduced speed.

Then, there's the question of the age of the bridge and its condition. At some point, it will need replacement. When that happens, provision of overhead is feasible.

Of course, while heavy rail fans would like to see the Outer Harbor line electrified, I'm not sure why that would have a high priority. Given the amount already spent on that line and on heavy rail generally, and the numbers of passengers, I reckon light rail extensions to Prospect, Henley Beach, Unley etc have a bigger priority.

So, when the bridge needs upgrading is probably a good time to allow for a long-term electrification.

Am I wrong in thinking this bridge received a minor rebuild/reinforcement relatively recently?

[AG]

I think this bridge had its lead paint removed and replaced with a new non-lead based paint - don't think it was strengthened though.

[PD2/20]

I think this bridge had its lead paint removed and replaced with a new non-lead based paint - don't think it was strengthened though.

It was the bow arch bridge (on the now Gawler tracks) that was repainted in 2017 during the Torrens Jn works. The truss bridge wasn't included in these works.

[MT269]

Hopefully there's a new timetable once Ovingham reopens. There's a lot of new development in the inner suburbs and 1 tph on weekends is terrible.
Also the weekday skip stop is archaic, stations such Munno Para and Womma need higher frequencies because they are close to booming new developments in Eyre, Munno Para , Munno Para West, Angle Vale etc. There's also a lot of subdivision happening in the older Elizabeth suburbs, I would say population is going to increase by at least 20% in the older Elizabeth suburbs. Playford and Gawler are booming. There's only a few stations that don't warrant a 15 min interpeak frequency eg Kudla. The train line should be the backbone of public transport.

Try convincing the department such. They simply don't give a flying... about anything. I use one of these intermediate stations on the odd occasion, and not being able to alight when coming from the north on a weekend is ludicrous. I've heard that it's an attempt to imitate the archaeic semi-stopper pattern which is used on weekdays.

By 2025, when all the electrics are delivered, hopefully there will be a review on the effects of DIT's half-brained ideas, by implementing a timetable with consistency. I don't think that they would want to spend a cent on additional trains to facilitate express running though. The Elizabeth turnback rails would surely be as rusty as the ones on the Barossa line by now.

I'd suggest replacing Greenfields and Parafield Gardens with an intermediate station about 300 metres south by the oval. Greenfields is simply too close to Mawson to be practical in the long term. Broadmeadows could be relocated about 400-500 metres to the north as well. There may be scope for a fifth (all-times) station between Smithfield and Gawler at some point, given the housing development in the area.

Edit: If the Port Dock extension does go ahead, it would probably be sensible to have the Grange trains running as a shuttle from Woodville, with the Dock services serving the immediate stations from Alberton to the city. It would still be sensible though to have Outer Harbor trains stopping at Woodville in both directions though, albeit whilst skipping St Clair.

[SBD]

Hopefully there's a new timetable once Ovingham reopens. There's a lot of new development in the inner suburbs and 1 tph on weekends is terrible.
Also the weekday skip stop is archaic, stations such Munno Para and Womma need higher frequencies because they are close to booming new developments in Eyre, Munno Para , Munno Para West, Angle Vale etc. There's also a lot of subdivision happening in the older Elizabeth suburbs, I would say population is going to increase by at least 20% in the older Elizabeth suburbs. Playford and Gawler are booming. There's only a few stations that don't warrant a 15 min interpeak frequency eg Kudla. The train line should be the backbone of public transport.

Try convincing the department such. They simply don't give a flying... about anything. I use one of these intermediate stations on the odd occasion, and not being able to alight when coming from the north on a weekend is ludicrous. I've heard that it's an attempt to imitate the archaeic semi-stopper pattern which is used on weekdays.

By 2025, when all the electrics are delivered, hopefully there will be a review on the effects of DIT's half-brained ideas, by implementing a timetable with consistency. I don't think that they would want to spend a cent on additional trains to facilitate express running though. The Elizabeth turnback rails would surely be as rusty as the ones on the Barossa line by now.

I'd suggest replacing Greenfields and Parafield Gardens with an intermediate station about 300 metres south by the oval. Greenfields is simply too close to Mawson to be practical in the long term. Broadmeadows could be relocated about 400-500 metres to the north as well. There may be scope for a fifth (all-times) station between Smithfield and Gawler at some point, given the housing development in the area.

Edit: If the Port Dock extension does go ahead, it would probably be sensible to have the Grange trains running as a shuttle from Woodville, with the Dock services serving the immediate stations from Alberton to the city. It would still be sensible though to have Outer Harbor trains stopping at Woodville in both directions though, albeit whilst skipping St Clair.

Moving Broadmeadows north makes it more evenly centred between Smithfield and Womma, but makes it no more accessible from the east, and less accessible from the west.

I'm not sure where you would add another station between Smithfield and Gawler? Near Curtis Road would be the most obvious, but it's not far from Smithfield. I imagine that residents from the northern parts of Angle Vale development would cross the expressway at Angle Vale Road and use Kudla station. Southern ones will cross at Curtis Road, but would they really save much by going to a new station on Curtis Road than using the existing ones at Smithfield and Munno Para (once Newton Boulevard goes through to Stebonheath Road)? Smithfield is near the shops, Munno Para is near the school, so removing either of them is not sensible.

[Eurostar]

I think the State Government could and should close Greenfields, Parafield Gardens and Chidda. All 3 have bus services nearby. Salisbury Highway should be a Go Zone.

[MT269]

@Eurostar

You're overlooking the fact that the 225 is a feeder most of the time, and provides an indirect route to the city. There is the option to go to Salisbury and switch there. But after dark, it is a gloomy rundown cesspit full of scumbags, with no security.

I am not in favour of removing stations that create 2.5km gaps between existing stations. But from Chidda to Mawson, you have 4 stations within 4 kms. The same argument could be made with Ovingham, Dudley Park and Islington. But these are around 2.3kms apart, which would disappoint many users if any were removed.

One of Greenfields and Parafield Gardens could go.

I'm referring to between Kudla and Tambelin which have a 3km gap. New estates are starting to come to life, and it will inevitably fill the gap between Smithfield and Evanston. It will make no sense to have stations over 3kms apart between Kudla and Tambelin once it becomes all housing.

[rubberman]

@Eurostar

You're overlooking the fact that the 225 is a feeder most of the time, and provides an indirect route to the city. There is the option to go to Salisbury and switch there. But after dark, it is a gloomy rundown cesspit full of scumbags, with no security.

I am not in favour of removing stations that create 2.5km gaps between existing stations. But from Chidda to Mawson, you have 4 stations within 4 kms. The same argument could be made with Ovingham, Dudley Park and Islington. But these are around 2.3kms apart, which would disappoint many users if any were removed.

One of Greenfields and Parafield Gardens could go.

I'm referring to between Kudla and Tambelin which have a 3km gap. New estates are starting to come to life, and it will inevitably fill the gap between Smithfield and Evanston. It will make no sense to have stations over 3kms apart between Kudla and Tambelin once it becomes all housing.

Spacings of 2.5km are pretty much the minimum if you want heavy rail. That sort of spacing allows heavy rail to work to its strengths of high speed. Once you get under two kms, that advantage dies off, and light rail starts looking better and better. It's exactly why the Glenelg line conversion from heavy rail to light rail worked. The short distances between stations on the Outer Harbor line are why there's always talk of conversion to light rail whenever big expenditures like new vehicles or electrification come up. The cost of conversion to 600v DC, less complicated signalling, cheaper vehicles is really easy to justify to the public if heavy rail isn't a lot faster. That means absolutely resisting extra stops unless there's a huge demand.