News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[muzzamo]

Good point Crawford but my question is that if we are getting new trains similar to those in Queensland and Perth which
have a top speed of 130km/hr why state that our trains will have a top speed of 110km/hr doesnt it make sense to
actually specify the actual train specification as the train has a top speed of 130km/hr but will only be allowed to
travel to a top speed of 110km/hr.

Is this Labour's way of trying to make our track upgrades etc look better than they actually are?

No, its because the general public are not rail nerds. Telling people these will go 110km/hr is exactly the right way he should be communicating it.

[fabricator]

Good point Crawford but my question is that if we are getting new trains similar to those in Queensland and Perth which
have a top speed of 130km/hr

Um no, read this thread http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... f=9&t=3163

The actual trains we are getting look like this, and are based on the Vlocity trains used in Regional Victoria.


Most of the station upgrade concept art so far has used a stand in model of train. As the specifications hadn't been prepared, much less a winning tender and final design. Given time I expect some new artwork to be prepared with the actual trains we are getting.

[craigie]

It doesn't matter what the top speeds of the trains are, The fact is that our network is going to have a limit of 110km p/h, so thats what our trains will be limited too. just as they are limited to 130 km p/h on some of the perth lines even though the trains can go faster. The top speed of those trains in
Perth is actually more around the 160 km p/h mark. They have just said it will have a top speed of 110 because thats as fast as they will be going on our network and thats as much as the public needs to know.

[rogue]

Even at 110kph, the trains will very rarely reach their max speed. Stations are too close together.

[AG]

Even at 110kph, the trains will very rarely reach their max speed. Stations are too close together.

Express trains.

[ozisnowman]

Is that an admission by the Government there are no plans for the next 30 years to Grade Seperate level crossings for the Adelaide Network.
Along with an indication that poor signalling and overtaking system not allowing too many express trains to overtake normal all stop trains.

With a proper switched signalling system you could have an express overtake on the opposite track and get it back to the proper side within
a jippy. All sounds too hard and too expensive for our government that like to do things on the cheap.

If they really want people to use the system they really need to increase the speed, frequency for the system to be used and for the so called
associated TOD's to be a success.

[muzzamo]

With a proper switched signalling system you could have an express overtake on the opposite track and get it back to the proper side within
a jippy. All sounds too hard and too expensive for our government that like to do things on the cheap.

They are spending 2 billion dollars and it is the largest investment in a rail system in a long time... give them credit where credit is due. I think the idea is to get our system *up to scratch* and then start making improvements.

[AG]

Is that an admission by the Government there are no plans for the next 30 years to Grade Seperate level crossings for the Adelaide Network.
Along with an indication that poor signalling and overtaking system not allowing too many express trains to overtake normal all stop trains.

With a proper switched signalling system you could have an express overtake on the opposite track and get it back to the proper side within
a jippy. All sounds too hard and too expensive for our government that like to do things on the cheap.

If they really want people to use the system they really need to increase the speed, frequency for the system to be used and for the so called
associated TOD's to be a success.

This is one of the keys to why Japan's urban rail systems operate so effectively with so few tracks. Typical corridors only have 2 tracks, but every so often a station is designated as a point where express trains pass slower trains either with only platforms serving the stopping trains and adjacent tracks without platforms, or a 4 platform system where the slower train pulls up first, then the express train pulls up on the opposite platform to allow interchange, and then the express train leaves before the slower train. It's about doing a lot more with less, and all of Australia's commuter rail systems are quite inefficient in their operations.

[Aidan]

Is that an admission by the Government there are no plans for the next 30 years to Grade Seperate level crossings for the Adelaide Network.
Along with an indication that poor signalling and overtaking system not allowing too many express trains to overtake normal all stop trains.

With a proper switched signalling system you could have an express overtake on the opposite track and get it back to the proper side within
a jippy. All sounds too hard and too expensive for our government that like to do things on the cheap.

If they really want people to use the system they really need to increase the speed, frequency for the system to be used and for the so called
associated TOD's to be a success.

This is one of the keys to why Japan's urban rail systems operate so effectively with so few tracks. Typical corridors only have 2 tracks, but every so often a station is designated as a point where express trains pass slower trains either with only platforms serving the stopping trains and adjacent tracks without platforms, or a 4 platform system where the slower train pulls up first, then the express train pulls up on the opposite platform to allow interchange, and then the express train leaves before the slower train. It's about doing a lot more with less, and all of Australia's commuter rail systems are quite inefficient in their operations.

Overtaking on the opposite track requires extremely reliable services, as any delays will have huge knockon effects. Allowing overtaking at stations is better, but does not give the operational flexibility that extended four track sections do. When overtaking opportunities are confined to fixed points, but trains still need to overtake, there will be no opportunity to increase the service frequency at all.

Much of the Gawler Line seems to have space along it for more tracks, and the construction of the Northern Connector should free up another track between Dry Creek and Salisbury, so there will be scope for overtaking when it's needed. But right now what we need are more frequent services - and that's not yet something that depends on the need to overtake.

[AG]

Overtaking on the opposite track requires extremely reliable services, as any delays will have huge knockon effects. Allowing overtaking at stations is better, but does not give the operational flexibility that extended four track sections do. When overtaking opportunities are confined to fixed points, but trains still need to overtake, there will be no opportunity to increase the service frequency at all.

Much of the Gawler Line seems to have space along it for more tracks, and the construction of the Northern Connector should free up another track between Dry Creek and Salisbury, so there will be scope for overtaking when it's needed. But right now what we need are more frequent services - and that's not yet something that depends on the need to overtake.

Ideally, this would be the most desirable layout to have (4 tracks total, 2 express tracks and 2 local tracks), although it would require a far bigger investment than rebuilding the tracks and platforms at several stations along the line and take longer to implement. The problem with having only passing points at stations is the required perfecting of the timetable in order to prevent delays, as you mentioned. But having passing points at stations is still a fair improvement on the current situation with a lower cost to implement. The Japanese systems still manage to run trains every 3 minutes on the lines that use this system, but it stretches the level crossings and rail system to their absolute limit.

[skyliner]

Overtaking on the opposite track requires extremely reliable services, as any delays will have huge knockon effects. Allowing overtaking at stations is better, but does not give the operational flexibility that extended four track sections do. When overtaking opportunities are confined to fixed points, but trains still need to overtake, there will be no opportunity to increase the service frequency at all.

Much of the Gawler Line seems to have space along it for more tracks, and the construction of the Northern Connector should free up another track between Dry Creek and Salisbury, so there will be scope for overtaking when it's needed. But right now what we need are more frequent services - and that's not yet something that depends on the need to overtake.

Ideally, this would be the most desirable layout to have (4 tracks total, 2 express tracks and 2 local tracks), although it would require a far bigger investment than rebuilding the tracks and platforms at several stations along the line and take longer to implement. The problem with having only passing points at stations is the required perfecting of the timetable in order to prevent delays, as you mentioned. But having passing points at stations is still a fair improvement on the current situation with a lower cost to implement. The Japanese systems still manage to run trains every 3 minutes on the lines that use this system, but it stretches the level crossings and rail system to their absolute limit.

In answer to the bold, some of our destinations would need allowance for goods trains as well - in the UK this has often amounted to a 5th track, depending on usage frequency. I agree that the most desirable layout is 4 tracks - esp. if the TT is at all unreliable or variable.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE

[AG]

Ideally, this would be the most desirable layout to have (4 tracks total, 2 express tracks and 2 local tracks), although it would require a far bigger investment than rebuilding the tracks and platforms at several stations along the line and take longer to implement. The problem with having only passing points at stations is the required perfecting of the timetable in order to prevent delays, as you mentioned. But having passing points at stations is still a fair improvement on the current situation with a lower cost to implement. The Japanese systems still manage to run trains every 3 minutes on the lines that use this system, but it stretches the level crossings and rail system to their absolute limit.

In answer to the bold, some of our destinations would need allowance for goods trains as well - in the UK this has often amounted to a 5th track, depending on usage frequency. I agree that the most desirable layout is 4 tracks - esp. if the TT is at all unreliable or variable.
[/quote]

When the Northern Connector and rail link is constructed, this shouldn't be too much of an issue north of Dry Creek. However, some thought will be required to accommodate the trains on the main line south of Dry Creek.

[metro]

Just from my observations it appears that the Dry Creek rail yards are now in use and some of the older trains are stored on some tracks in Adelaide. Looks like quite a number of the trains have been upgraded to a 21st century standard too. Trackworks have started on the Noarlunga line. The Hallet cove stations are still looking very unfinished, and work on Elizabeth/Munno Para stations looks like it's been forgotten about (werent they supposed to start construction last year? ). and the overhead Electric power supply should start appearing on at least the Noarlunga Line over this year as the first new trains are expected next year, but if there are any delays or problems, that could change.

Lastly about the thread title; "TransAdelaide" doesnt exist anymore

[fabricator]

The Hallet cove stations are still looking very unfinished, and work on Elizabeth/Munno Para stations looks like it's been forgotten about (werent they supposed to start construction last year? ).

Hallet Cove station is finished, but will get more roof covering once the line is 100% electric railcars (exhaust fumes. Hallet Cove Beach was found to have unexpected problems with the platform structure requiring complete demolition.

Munno Para station (not to be confused with Smithfield Station next to Munno Para Shopping Center) has as earth ramp that stops at the railway corridor, the only logical solution is the mound is a bus terminal, which will meet up a new concrete platform face and surface. No idea what is happening at Elizabeth Station.

[jk1237]

Has the Noarlunga line now closed from Oaklands? 6 months is a while, I wonder if they will gradually reopen the line further down once the tracks are done