News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[crawf]

I thought Electrification was meant to start this year

[Waewick]

I thought Electrification was meant to start this year

so did I !

[Aidan]

Even if you think closure is justified, do you really think closing the line all the way to Oaklands (rather than Brighton) is justified?

Ah yes, As Brighton station wasn't included in the stage one upgrades around the Oaklands area, hence he track through Brighton station will be being ripped up. If I recall the previous upgrade only went as far south as the Jetty Road level crossing.

This is a good example of letting the bigger picture blind you to everything else. You think a prolonged closure is justified on the grounds that it hasn't already been upgraded, but you don't stop to consider how many minutes it adds to each passenger's journey time on the replacement bus, how many seconds it will eventually save off the rail journey time, how many years it would take before there's a net benefit to them, how many Park&Ride commuters will drive all the way instead, and how much delay that's going to cause other motorists and bus passengers.

Nor do you consider how easy it would be to upgrade that short section without closing the line.

[Will]

Even if you think closure is justified, do you really think closing the line all the way to Oaklands (rather than Brighton) is justified?
Do you think slowing down the trains by making them stop more (mostly all) stations between Oaklands and Adelaide is justified?
Do you think running the replacement buses down three streets affected by roadworks is justified?

Just how bad would it have to be before you admit it's a complete cockup?

Each to his own, but I would have thought that cost and convenience would eclipse any inconvenience caused by making people have to catch the bus for 6 months.

If the line remained open whilst works were carried out concurrently, delays would still be expected as the trains would obviously have to slow down around workmen, not to mention the OHS hazards created by having people work next to moving trains. Furthermore, there would be a higher chance of works being carried out, outside of normal hours, adding to the cost of construction.

Closing the line completely (like they did with the tram), ensures that works can be completed faster, which results in less overall inconvenience, not just to commuters but to neighbouring properties, whilst saving money for the taxpayer. If the downside is making people catch a bus, then, I think that is not really to bad in the overall big picture.

[rubberman]

To which one might add, that once people get out of public transport and into their cars for any length of time, they will develop a habit of getting in their cars and going to town. How many PT users will in fact have been lost to the system forever because of being mucked around with? And why? Because nobody actually thought a few years ahead about how to manage what was then routine track maintenance, until it became a monster requiring wholesale replacement and disruption.

The problem is, that this has been obvious for some time now, and there seems to be a consistent wilfulness about not planning these things properly that is harming public transport in this state. I would like to be able to say that all this has happened in the past, and that we should look to the future, but without some evidence that we have learnt from the past, we are doomed to keep repeating those failures. That becomes a problem since there is a lot of work still to be done, and if those who are doing the planning (as opposed to the project execution, which seems to be ok) are not acknowledging or even aware of the shortcomings, then nothing will change. Note, I am not asking for heads to roll, or people be put up against a wall and shot, merely that they learn from the mistakes of the past and do better with the large numbers of dollars entrusted to them.

What's the bet that even when the new electric cars come in, they will keep the diesel timetable?

[Archer]

Even if you think closure is justified, do you really think closing the line all the way to Oaklands (rather than Brighton) is justified?

Ah yes, As Brighton station wasn't included in the stage one upgrades around the Oaklands area, hence he track through Brighton station will be being ripped up. If I recall the previous upgrade only went as far south as the Jetty Road level crossing.

This is a good example of letting the bigger picture blind you to everything else. You think a prolonged closure is justified on the grounds that it hasn't already been upgraded, but you don't stop to consider how many minutes it adds to each passenger's journey time on the replacement bus, how many seconds it will eventually save off the rail journey time, how many years it would take before there's a net benefit to them, how many Park&Ride commuters will drive all the way instead, and how much delay that's going to cause other motorists and bus passengers.

Nor do you consider how easy it would be to upgrade that short section without closing the line.

And you are nit picking. How long till a net benefit to the commuters? What about all of the other benefits this projects will ultimately provide, you are ignoring all of them. Yes it hurts now, both for the commuters and those of us driving (I've seen large increases in driving time co-incide with the closure), but I think the benefits will far outweigh the pain once it and the rest of the electrification project are completed.

[Aidan]

Ah yes, As Brighton station wasn't included in the stage one upgrades around the Oaklands area, hence he track through Brighton station will be being ripped up. If I recall the previous upgrade only went as far south as the Jetty Road level crossing.

This is a good example of letting the bigger picture blind you to everything else. You think a prolonged closure is justified on the grounds that it hasn't already been upgraded, but you don't stop to consider how many minutes it adds to each passenger's journey time on the replacement bus, how many seconds it will eventually save off the rail journey time, how many years it would take before there's a net benefit to them, how many Park&Ride commuters will drive all the way instead, and how much delay that's going to cause other motorists and bus passengers.

Nor do you consider how easy it would be to upgrade that short section without closing the line.

And you are nit picking. How long till a net benefit to the commuters? What about all of the other benefits this projects will ultimately provide, you are ignoring all of them. Yes it hurts now, both for the commuters and those of us driving (I've seen large increases in driving time co-incide with the closure), but I think the benefits will far outweigh the pain once it and the rest of the electrification project are completed.

What other benefits?

I guess you also think I'm nitpicking when I point out that electrification is a separate project. The line could be electrified without upgrading the track. Of course the journey time benefits from doing so wouldn't be quite as big, but it's still a matter of seconds whereas the buses take minutes longer.

The time wasted as the buses go the long way around brighton and crawl through the back streets to Oaklands is significant, and it will be decades before the time saved makes up for the current inconvenience. If that's nitpicking, WTF would you regard as a serious objection?

[Tonsley213]

To the whingers,

I am getting sick of this crap that gets posted about the inconvenience caused by the closure because as we've seen before that the train services bounce back once they are reinstated. Have you guys forgotten that this has happened twice before? No you haven't but your too stuck up about the slightest little inconvenience caused to you to think about the fact that the Gawler closure is the exact same as the current closure.

GET OVER IT AND DEAL WITH IT. If you don't like the bus, drive to the Tonsley Line and get that one.

[jk1237]

you would hope that they are starting new trackwork at Oaklands and move towards Brighton first so that trains can start to terminate at Brighton in a few weeks, but I have a feeling that they are starting at the Noarlunga end first and working back towards town, which is a bit silly IMO

[Archer]

What other benefits?

I guess you also think I'm nitpicking when I point out that electrification is a separate project. The line could be electrified without upgrading the track. Of course the journey time benefits from doing so wouldn't be quite as big, but it's still a matter of seconds whereas the buses take minutes longer.

The time wasted as the buses go the long way around brighton and crawl through the back streets to Oaklands is significant, and it will be decades before the time saved makes up for the current inconvenience. If that's nitpicking, WTF would you regard as a serious objection?

I think your problem Aidan is that you're not seeing the "Big Picture" and focusing too much on the immediate inconveniences. Call Electrification a separate project if you like, but it still forms the "Bigger Picture". The New Trains are going to be Standard gauge (cost benefits in purchase and maintenance for SG if I recall correctly), the line needs to be converted so they can run on it, so all the sleepers have to be replaced. So this upgrade must go ahead before electrification can be done. And yes there are other projects involved as well before we see all the benefits at the end of the "Big Picture", but greater convenience and flexibility for commuters as well as reduced pollution through the rail corridor, cost savings and quieter running trains for residents along the line, I would class as "Other benefits".

I would have thought faster and more frequent services providing greater choice to commuters once complete would be enough for most people to put up with the inconvenience we have now.

And while I am no longer catching the Noarlunga train on a daily basis, I know people who are and they've indicated that the bus service is not too bad. Probably not the case for everyone, I'm sure the inconvenience is worse for some people and I sympathise with them, but the work must be done.

[craigie]

The new trains are going to be broad gauge. The network wont be standardised for at least 10 years. Its impossible to do an upgrade like this while running trains, all the track layers are being replaced from base up, new drainage is being installed, even if you ran on single line track it would be under train order authority in the direction opposing the signals and would be a slower trip than getting the bus. The electric trains will most likely be ran as shuttles from seaford to noarlunga in the beginning for testing and training. People shouldnt complain go back 3 or 4 years and there was no news and nothing happening with our rail, at least now things are moving along in the right direction.

[rubberman]

To the wingers,

I am getting sick of this crap that gets posted about the inconvenience caused by the closure because as we've seen before that the train services bounce back once they are reinstated. Have you guys forgotten that this has happened twice before? No you haven't but your too stuck up about the slightest little inconvenience caused to you to think about the fact that the Gawler closure is the exact same as the current closure.

GET OVER IT AND DEAL WITH IT. If you don't like the bus, drive to the Tonsley Line and get that one.

Is that right 'wingers' or left 'wingers' Tonsley.

The point some of us are complaining about is that it HAS happened twice before. Once is understandable, twice is deplorable, but three times tells me that there is incompetence afoot. Should we really sit back and let this sort of forseeable situation continue into the future - because it happened in the past?

It would be ok to "GET OVER IT AND DEAL WITH IT" if there were no more projects in the pipeline to stuff up with poor planning.

However, you may have noticed that there are some projects coming up - the extension of the tram and the electrification.

Are you suggesting that now we know the planning for three major transport decisions has been flawed, that we just sit back and wait for it to happen on the next projects? I hope that is NOT what you are proposing?

[AtD]

All the complaining makes this sound like RailPage

[craigie]

The best way to do the upgrade would have been to shut the whole network down and done it all at once for 6 to 12 months like they did in Perth. I don't think our gov't has the money to do that though and they probably didnt want the services to stop.

[Aidan]

The best way to do the upgrade would have been to shut the whole network down and done it all at once for 6 to 12 months like they did in Perth. I don't think our gov't has the money to do that though and they probably didnt want the services to stop.

In what way would that have been best? It would've devastated our economy as traffic congestion would've made our CBD relatively inaccessible, with parking prohibitively expensive for many people.

Perth's CBD had freeways to it and ample parking around it - they had become care dependent, whereas we rely on our railways. The best way to do the upgrade would have been to avoid any extended closures at all.