News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[PeFe]

There is no need to build a tram line down down Port Road to "activate" the road with apartments etc.....the heavy rail line is only 150-200 metres away and there will always be bus services along the corridor. Start building now....

Express trains Port Adelaide to Adelaide Railway Station....15 minutes....all stop trains 21 minutes.

All stop tram from Glenelg to Adelaide Railway Station......38 minutes.

[SRW]

There is no need to build a tram line down down Port Road to "activate" the road with apartments etc.....the heavy rail line is only 150-200 metres away and there will always be bus services along the corridor. Start building now....

Express trains Port Adelaide to Adelaide Railway Station....15 minutes....all stop trains 21 minutes.

All stop tram from Glenelg to Adelaide Railway Station......38 minutes.

Yes, exactly. You could argue Port Road is better connected than either Anzac Highway or Churchill Road, and yet they're booming with residential construction. Not sure if there's a zoning issue, but I can imagine Port Road developing similarly without much effort.

[rubberman]

There is no need to build a tram line down down Port Road to "activate" the road with apartments etc.....the heavy rail line is only 150-200 metres away and there will always be bus services along the corridor. Start building now....

Express trains Port Adelaide to Adelaide Railway Station....15 minutes....all stop trains 21 minutes.

All stop tram from Glenelg to Adelaide Railway Station......38 minutes.

The tram has to go through the city, so it's not a valid comparison. Further, trams could easily run faster.

Sure, express trains are heavy rail's forte, so why not use heavy rail as it's intended? What I can't wrap my head around is having heavy rail trying to do the job of trams or buses. Either use heavy rail for fast longer distances, or trams/buses for shorter stop distances.

[ChillyPhilly]

Light rail down Port Road can, by extension, replace stops that may be removed from the OH/Grange lines:

- West Croydon (possibly Croydon too)
- Woodville Park
- Cheltenham.

Bus services, except for the O-Bahn, probably won't encourage increases in density - as much as we want it to/as much as it should.

[PeFe]

You don't have heavy rail and light rail 150 metres apart servicing the same area except where the density justifies it. You could increase the density twofold and it it still wouldn't justify two rail modes so close to each other. Basic transport economics.

[Spotto]

Light rail down Port Road can, by extension, replace stops that may be removed from the OH/Grange lines:

- West Croydon (possibly Croydon too)
- Woodville Park
- Cheltenham.

Spend $X million demolishing existing train stations, then spend millions more to replace those same stations with tram stops on a brand new tram line, plus stops that will double up with the stations that remain.

Am I missing something?

[Goodsy]

Light rail down Port Road can, by extension, replace stops that may be removed from the OH/Grange lines:

- West Croydon (possibly Croydon too)
- Woodville Park
- Cheltenham.

Spend $X million demolishing existing train stations, then spend millions more to replace those same stations with tram stops on a brand new tram line, plus stops that will double up with the stations that remain.

Am I missing something?

Tram stops dont need to be anything more than a step up from the curb.

Personally if I was the transport Tsar I'd have the line terminate at the Port Dock Station and have Lefevre serviced by trams with a small network around Port Adelaide. It would then just make sense to run a line all the way along Port Road to connect it to the Adelaide network

multiple tram lines in Melbourne follow train lines, why can't we do the same?

[ChillyPhilly]

My main point regarding light rail down Port Road is that it would form the key spine for a western suburbs light rail network. No other corridor can handle this.

[rhino]

How would you deal with the 47 street crossings of the Port Road median between the Entertainment Centre and Port Adelaide station?

[SouthAussie94]

How would you deal with the 47 street crossings of the Port Road median between the Entertainment Centre and Port Adelaide station?

Put the trams in a trench.

But then you would have overhead wires at Port Road Street level which could be unsafe so make the trams wireless.

But also the trench would probably fill with water so you would need big pumps to stop it filling up.

But if the pumps failed and the trench filled up with water it would probably be unsafe so we would need trams that could work in water incase the pumps failed.

But if we had too much water then the trams might float which would be unsafe so we would need special trams which could still work if they floated.

And they would still need to be wireless. So we would need special trams that could float and operate without wires.

Maybe it would be better if the trams had an engine instead? Floating trams with an engine? We could call it the Float-Bahn. It would be a unique Adelaide form of transport that would put us on the map.

[rubberman]

How would you deal with the 47 street crossings of the Port Road median between the Entertainment Centre and Port Adelaide station?

Put the trams in a trench.

But then you would have overhead wires at Port Road Street level which could be unsafe so make the trams wireless.

But also the trench would probably fill with water so you would need big pumps to stop it filling up.

But if the pumps failed and the trench filled up with water it would probably be unsafe so we would need trams that could work in water incase the pumps failed.

But if we had too much water then the trams might float which would be unsafe so we would need special trams which could still work if they floated.

And they would still need to be wireless. So we would need special trams that could float and operate without wires.

Maybe it would be better if the trams had an engine instead? Floating trams with an engine? We could call it the Float-Bahn. It would be a unique Adelaide form of transport that would put us on the map.

Yup. Much simpler to convert the Outer Harbor line to trams. If a tram down the Port Road is needed, let them use traffic lights like anywhere else in the world that has a tram system. Or like King William Street.

Mind you, we are all just guessing here. Without the numbers and costing available, people can only express preferences. While that's fun, it doesn't help good policy development. This is where journalists could and should add value: ask and demand answers from politicians about the numbers involved, then inform the public, so we can debate using real numbers, rather than attempts to justify our own preferences.

[Vasco]

No one talking about the issues caused by a significant number of new at grade crossings on Port Road.

Not to mention the cost of such an exercise.

Silly idea IMO that doesn’t achieve much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rubberman]

No one talking about the issues caused by a significant number of new at grade crossings on Port Road.

Not to mention the cost of such an exercise.

Silly idea IMO that doesn’t achieve much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably because it's not clear why that's a problem. They are trams. So, everywhere else in the world, they just take off at the traffic lights along with the cars and trucks when the lights turn green. It's not clear what extra cost is involved. In a lot of places round the world, especially at minor crossings, they only have tram signs and nothing else. Trams are literally designed to run on roads in amongst traffic. Grade crossings for trams are a very unusual feature round the world, rather than the norm.

Here's a crossing in Olomouc. No extra cost needed.

[Vasco]

20230606_104435.jpg

No one talking about the issues caused by a significant number of new at grade crossings on Port Road.

Not to mention the cost of such an exercise.

Silly idea IMO that doesn’t achieve much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably because it's not clear why that's a problem. They are trams. So, everywhere else in the world, they just take off at the traffic lights along with the cars and trucks when the lights turn green. It's not clear what extra cost is involved. In a lot of places round the world, especially at minor crossings, they only have tram signs and nothing else. Trams are literally designed to run on roads in amongst traffic. Grade crossings for trams are a very unusual feature round the world, rather than the norm.

Here's a crossing in Olomouc. No extra cost needed.

It’s a feature of our tram system that it involves either level crossings or signalised crossings via traffic lights.

Trams on roads were also removed to now only run on dedicated tracks. So returning to a non signalised system would be a significant change, regardless of what happens elsewhere in the world.

In regards to cost, my comment is in regards to the cost of building any new line (in this case, of great length and only mere metres away from a perfectly fine rail system).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rubberman]

20230606_104435.jpg

No one talking about the issues caused by a significant number of new at grade crossings on Port Road.

Not to mention the cost of such an exercise.

Silly idea IMO that doesn’t achieve much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably because it's not clear why that's a problem. They are trams. So, everywhere else in the world, they just take off at the traffic lights along with the cars and trucks when the lights turn green. It's not clear what extra cost is involved. In a lot of places round the world, especially at minor crossings, they only have tram signs and nothing else. Trams are literally designed to run on roads in amongst traffic. Grade crossings for trams are a very unusual feature round the world, rather than the norm.

Here's a crossing in Olomouc. No extra cost needed.

It’s a feature of our tram system that it involves either level crossings or signalised crossings via traffic lights.

Trams on roads were also removed to now only run on dedicated tracks. So returning to a non signalised system would be a significant change, regardless of what happens elsewhere in the world.

In regards to cost, my comment is in regards to the cost of building any new line (in this case, of great length and only mere metres away from a perfectly fine rail system).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We shouldn't be "regardless of what happens elsewhere in the world". We are a very small operator of trams, so we should be using the experience and practices of operators that know what they are doing. Now, if the argument boils down to "we won't put trams down Port Road because we put ridiculous restrictions on it", that's just inviting someone to say "how about we do it properly instead?". I mean, it's daft enough that we use the Outer Harbor line as if it were a tram service, so why make it even more daft by building a tramway along Port Road as if it were heavy rail? How about we use reasonable international practice? Where's the benefit of reinventing the wheel?