Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
-
The_Q915
- Sen-Rookie-Sational
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:24 pm
#1846
Post
by The_Q915 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:38 pm
Edgar wrote:And how can the government stuffed our new tram system? It hasn't been better off since it started operations, and the extension was just as good, if not, better than the old route. To say they stuffed it is a cheap childish typical opposition comments, from someone who cannot afford to come out with anything better if they were in the positions.
If I may point out a few areas which could of been better managed.
What fool anticipates a growth in patronage but does not increase capacity. The trams can not be coupled and each carrys less then the existing trams. Frequencys can not be increased because they did not build grade seperations. They are building an overpass over south road probably with more distruptions then if they had done it when the whole line was being upgraded. They also tryed to cut short the resleeping of the tracks. This lead to derailments and futer cost in fixing the tracks. They rushed the purchase of the trams to be ready by the next election possiably leading to us paying much more then we could have. If I can remember they cost almost 6m each. Much more then melbourne pays.
Last edited by
The_Q915 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Im dead serious
-
muzzamo
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:44 pm
#1847
Post
by muzzamo » Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:13 pm
Im a big fan of the trams but valid points.
-
jk1237
- Donating Member
- Posts: 1756
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:22 pm
- Location: Adelaide
#1848
Post
by jk1237 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:44 pm
sorry to argue with you again The-Q915, but i think 1 flexity can carry a similar number of people as 2 H's, its just that there are more people standing on the flexity. I'll have to properly check, but the flexity is quite a long tram compared to the average tram around the world. And most of the derailments occured at the old points leading just out of Glengowrie, which were replaced at the time of resleepering. It was some of the straight sections of track that werent replaced at the time. Dont know why it wasnt done all at once, but they were deemed safe to travel on, just a bit bumpy, thats all. Grade separations would be excellent, but they're pretty expensive
However a few 4 section long trams would be good.
-
Will409
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:12 am
- Location: Parafield Gardens
#1849
Post
by Will409 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:26 pm
Some comparisons to lay this arguement to rest. Up for comparison is an H, a Flexi and a Melbourne D1 (3 section) and D2 (5 section). I have to appolgise about the quality of the H class drawing but it does date from 1952.
H class
Adelaide Flexity Classic (also known as the I class)
Melbourne D1 (3 section) and D2 (5 section)
http://www.siemens.com.au/transportatio ... _Trams.pdf
Go to page 2 for diagrams.
LINK TO YOUTUBE PROFILE.
-
monotonehell
- VIP Member
- Posts: 5466
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
- Location: Adelaide, East End.
-
Contact:
#1850
Post
by monotonehell » Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:15 pm
So the H class was 64/170 and the Flexity is 64/115? Or were crush loads estimated more sardine-like back in the 1950s?
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.
-
AtD
- VIP Member
- Posts: 4581
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
- Location: Sydney
#1851
Post
by AtD » Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:23 pm
I'd like to see 170 people in a H class...
-
monotonehell
- VIP Member
- Posts: 5466
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
- Location: Adelaide, East End.
-
Contact:
#1852
Post
by monotonehell » Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:50 pm
AtD wrote:I'd like to see 170 people in a H class...
I wouldn't.
Although even when only partly full the Flexitys feel cramped and the seats are awfully uncomfortable.
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.
-
jk1237
- Donating Member
- Posts: 1756
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:22 pm
- Location: Adelaide
#1853
Post
by jk1237 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:51 pm
crikeys, 170 crush load in 1 H. That would be funny to see. Was it based on a crush load of 4 year old skinny runts
Now from my calculations, our 3 section flexity is longer than the 5-section siemens thingo in Melb.
I wonder why there are so many flexy points in the new Melb trams, is it to get around sharp corners easier?
-
Will409
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:12 am
- Location: Parafield Gardens
#1854
Post
by Will409 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:01 pm
I think there are more joints in the 5 section Combino (our as some railfans there have called them, Bambinos) because of the stupid truck arrangement which is no better then trams from 1900. Basically, the 4 wheels under each section are rigidly fixed to the body. You can imagine what sort of issues you would have if the tram body was longer then it currently is. There are also a few curves on the Melbourne system that are sharper then the one on North Terrace, the sharpest of which are a very tight 18m radius.
Here is a photo of the stupid axleless truck fitted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Comb ... hassis.jpg
LINK TO YOUTUBE PROFILE.
-
Norman
- Donating Member
- Posts: 6488
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
#1855
Post
by Norman » Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:09 pm
Not to mention their uglyness
-
Omicron
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2336
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm
#1856
Post
by Omicron » Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:14 am
monotonehell wrote:AtD wrote:I'd like to see 170 people in a H class...
I wouldn't.
Although even when only partly full the Flexitys feel cramped and the seats are awfully uncomfortable.
I really don't understand why those seats are as awful as they are. New buses that I've travelled in have quite thick padding on the seats and are very comfortable; in fact, the little fold-down seats in the wheelchair sections of the tram have much better padding than the main seating areas, so I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind such hard park-benches.
-
AtD
- VIP Member
- Posts: 4581
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
- Location: Sydney
#1857
Post
by AtD » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:03 am
The_Q915 wrote:If I may point out a few areas which could of been better managed.
What fool anticipates a growth in patronage but does not increase capacity. The trams can not be coupled and each carrys less then the existing trams. Frequencys can not be increased because they did not build grade seperations. They are building an overpass over south road probably with more distruptions then if they had done it when the whole line was being upgraded. They also tryed to cut short the resleeping of the tracks. This lead to derailments and futer cost in fixing the tracks. They rushed the purchase of the trams to be ready by the next election possiably leading to us paying much more then we could have. If I can remember they cost almost 6m each. Much more then melbourne pays.
You haven't been playing with Wikipedia recently, have you?
-
Will409
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1038
- Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:12 am
- Location: Parafield Gardens
#1858
Post
by Will409 » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:19 am
Omicron wrote:monotonehell wrote:AtD wrote:I'd like to see 170 people in a H class...
I wouldn't.
Although even when only partly full the Flexitys feel cramped and the seats are awfully uncomfortable.
I really don't understand why those seats are as awful as they are. New buses that I've travelled in have quite thick padding on the seats and are very comfortable; in fact, the little fold-down seats in the wheelchair sections of the tram have much better padding than the main seating areas, so I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind such hard park-benches.
The seats are rock hard to prevent seat slashing.
LINK TO YOUTUBE PROFILE.
-
monotonehell
- VIP Member
- Posts: 5466
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
- Location: Adelaide, East End.
-
Contact:
#1859
Post
by monotonehell » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:49 am
Will409 wrote:The seats are rock hard to prevent seat slashing.
That'd be right, vandals making things uncomfortable for everyone else. One problem with public property is you have to factor in vandalism. So annoying.
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.
-
UrbanSG
- VIP Member
- Posts: 1848
- Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 8:55 am
#1860
Post
by UrbanSG » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:02 am
Has anyone noticed the new glass screens and what I think may be timetable boards/possible advertising going up going up at the tramstops yesterday/today? Could look fairly decent. It looks like they may be electronic screens but I can't be sure.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests