Sensational-Adelaide.com

The hourly rate for traffic controllers is pretty justified.

They often are casual employees who have to alternate their sleep cycle, sometimes at the drop of a hat - especially the case with emergency works in regional locations. They are involved with creating and implementing traffic management plans, operating radios, driving trucks, observing and ensuring adherence to safety procedures for themselves, construction/civil staff and motorists. Standing around with a bat in hand is the least difficult yet most time consuming aspect of the job.

Bob wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:09 am

The Woodville-Grange branch line will be the next likely target as not viable from some inside the Liberal party.

There will try on an argument that buses do the job and the $$$ required to keep this branch line open are too high.

I wonder how many Liberal donors and party executives are members of the Royal Adelaide

Also, wasn't there an upgrade of the Woodville Station announced not long ago? I wonder if this "upgrade" was also to conveniently cut the connection to Grange like they did at the NRM - "Oh whoops, oh well its cut now. Might as well get rid of the rest of it"
Knoll has to go. He obviously has no idea about public transport and thinks taxpayers are all idiots. Its so obvious that those sleepers were for the Port Project. I've heard around town that even his own father can't stand him so go figure.

NTRabbit wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:04 pm

Bob wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:09 am

The Woodville-Grange branch line will be the next likely target as not viable from some inside the Liberal party.

There will try on an argument that buses do the job and the $$$ required to keep this branch line open are too high.

I wonder how many Liberal donors and party executives are members of the Royal Adelaide

All emotion aside, the Grange spur serves at best a few hundred commuters, and half of its length is through a golf course. It is not economically viable, and even as a community service is questionable given access to a couple of the stations. Had Labor got on with coast to coast, instead of pfaffing around, it would likely be well on track to being a light rail, also serving West Lakes. As predicted, the obsession with trying for heavy rail overkill on the OH corridor, looks like resulting in no rail for either Port Dock, Grange, or even Semaphore and West lakes.

claybro wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:18 pm

Had Labor got on with coast to coast, instead of pfaffing around, it would likely be well on track to being a light rail, also serving West Lakes. As predicted, the obsession with trying for heavy rail overkill on the OH corridor, looks like resulting in no rail for either Port Dock, Grange, or even Semaphore and West lakes.

I liked Labor's ideas for a Norwood tram and a North Adelaide/Prospect Rd tram (probably no further than Regency Road though). But PortLINK was too out there. The Outer Harbor Line should remain heavy rail, a tram frequently stopping would make the journey too long. Keep trains as the principal long-distance route for faster journeys and higher capacity, and use trams for shorter local connectivity. I've already voiced my opinions on a Port Adelaide-Semaphore tram, but the current trains should be kept as trains (Grange Line who knows, but Outer Harbor definitely).

The long term cost of ripping up a train line also has to be considered. Adelaide has a history of reusing the land for residential and commercial purposes that make a rebuild of the lines impossible. If a train route is being under-utilized that is a good sign the area has a strong potential for future development that would make good use of the line and shutting it down would be very short sighted.

On the thoughts of a tram running just Port Adelaide to Semaphore, rather than connected to the rest of the network:

I've for a while advocated for a much more significant Port Dock station that incorporates a new northern entrance (and upgrade) of the National Railway Museum over the area that is currently the police station, courts, and car park. What if... the tramway museum (currently at St Kilda) was to merge with the railway museum? The tramway museum currently runs heritage trams on a short line to the adventure playground — if they were to move to Port Adelaide, then potentially Port Adelaide to Semaphore could be a heritage line serving dual purpose as a feeder to the heavy rail line as well as a museum attraction.

Not viable? Then make it viable. That's the government's job.

Nathan wrote:On the thoughts of a tram running just Port Adelaide to Semaphore, rather than connected to the rest of the network:

I've for a while advocated for a much more significant Port Dock station that incorporates a new northern entrance (and upgrade) of the National Railway Museum over the area that is currently the police station, courts, and car park. What if... the tramway museum (currently at St Kilda) was to merge with the railway museum? The tramway museum currently runs heritage trams on a short line to the adventure playground — if they were to move to Port Adelaide, then potentially Port Adelaide to Semaphore could be a heritage line serving dual purpose as a feeder to the heavy rail line as well as a museum attraction.

That sounds like a fantastic idea, if only the politicians cared enough to support this...

Of course, you would have to consult with the tramway museum first.

Nathan wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:32 pm

What if... the tramway museum (currently at St Kilda) was to merge with the railway museum? The tramway museum currently runs heritage trams on a short line to the adventure playground — if they were to move to Port Adelaide, then potentially Port Adelaide to Semaphore could be a heritage line serving dual purpose as a feeder to the heavy rail line as well as a museum attraction.

The Bendigo Tramway runs just over 4km, a tram running from Semaphore Beach along Semaphore Road, down Carlisle Street then along Hart/St Vincent Streets turning onto Baker Street stopping on the road next to Jacketts Siding is almost 3.5km. If we can convince the Tramway Museum and NRM to either merge or at the very least collaborate, who knows what's possible.

Making the trams somewhat accessible may be an issue though, to eliminate the (significant) step up platforms would have to be higher than the modern ones in the CBD. And if we can reclaim the rail corridor next to Glanville station, we've got our depot space. Or, if we continue the track along St Vincent Street, converting the drainage land at Perkins Drive, or continue down next to the Aviation Museum.

Spotto wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:30 pm

claybro wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:18 pm

Had Labor got on with coast to coast, instead of pfaffing around, it would likely be well on track to being a light rail, also serving West Lakes. As predicted, the obsession with trying for heavy rail overkill on the OH corridor, looks like resulting in no rail for either Port Dock, Grange, or even Semaphore and West lakes.

I liked Labor's ideas for a Norwood tram and a North Adelaide/Prospect Rd tram (probably no further than Regency Road though). But PortLINK was too out there. The Outer Harbor Line should remain heavy rail, a tram frequently stopping would make the journey too long. Keep trains as the principal long-distance route for faster journeys and higher capacity, and use trams for shorter local connectivity. I've already voiced my opinions on a Port Adelaide-Semaphore tram, but the current trains should be kept as trains (Grange Line who knows, but Outer Harbor definitely).

In "the good old days", there was a tram network centred on Port Adelaide and a tram line in Gawler. Both concentrated people into the railway stations, but used real trains to transport people to/from Adelaide.

Norman wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:44 pm

Nathan wrote:On the thoughts of a tram running just Port Adelaide to Semaphore, rather than connected to the rest of the network:

I've for a while advocated for a much more significant Port Dock station that incorporates a new northern entrance (and upgrade) of the National Railway Museum over the area that is currently the police station, courts, and car park. What if... the tramway museum (currently at St Kilda) was to merge with the railway museum? The tramway museum currently runs heritage trams on a short line to the adventure playground — if they were to move to Port Adelaide, then potentially Port Adelaide to Semaphore could be a heritage line serving dual purpose as a feeder to the heavy rail line as well as a museum attraction.

That sounds like a fantastic idea, if only the politicians cared enough to support this...

Of course, you would have to consult with the tramway museum first.

The perfect scenario. The tramway museum at St Kilda is terrific but out of reach for most tourists and a lot of locals. Merging or adjacent to the NRM in the Port would be a win win. Including heritage stock on a Semaphore tramway would be a huge attraction. The Port Dock station idea works too. Sadly not a chance though with this government. They’re closing the Douglas Mawson TAFE in the Port, ditching the spur line, selling the land around Dock 2 to make it unviable as a potential maritime park, trashing Shed 26, cutting Port bus services, and defunding maritime attractions. They’re even selling the car park adjacent Hart’s Mill which survived the wreckers is now a thriving events precinct. They don’t give a rats about the amazing potential of the place.

If the tram museum could be brought to the Port, and if the National Motor Museum opened a campus (or simply relocated from Birdwood) there, marketing the Museums in the Port as a transportation discovery destination would be a cinch. There'd be aviation, rail, motor and maritime all in the one place. Perhaps colocate the Migration Museum there too, tying them altogether with the state's history of settlement.

SRW wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:41 pm

If the tram museum could be brought to the Port, and if the National Motor Museum opened a campus (or simply relocated from Birdwood) there, marketing the Museums in the Port as a transportation discovery destination would be a cinch. There'd be aviation, rail, motor and maritime all in the one place. Perhaps colocate the Migration Museum there too, tying them altogether with the state's history of settlement.

THIS!!

The Migration Museum is pretty well established in the city's arts and culture precinct, and the people of Birdwood probably wouldn't like a potential tourist drawcard (no matter how out-of-the-way it is) being taken from them, but turning the Port into "the museum city" would be fantastic for business.

Spotto wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:51 pm

SRW wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:41 pm

If the tram museum could be brought to the Port, and if the National Motor Museum opened a campus (or simply relocated from Birdwood) there, marketing the Museums in the Port as a transportation discovery destination would be a cinch. There'd be aviation, rail, motor and maritime all in the one place. Perhaps colocate the Migration Museum there too, tying them altogether with the state's history of settlement.

THIS!!

The Migration Museum is pretty well established in the city's arts and culture precinct, and the people of Birdwood probably wouldn't like a potential tourist drawcard (no matter how out-of-the-way it is) being taken from them, but turning the Port into "the museum city" would be fantastic for business.

I wouldn't want to take an attraction away from a small town without their acceptance, but my feeling is that the motor museum probably has enough exhibits to sustain two campuses anyway (or should have, in the home of Australia's former automotive industry).

But you're right, the museums are befitting of the Port's heritage. Further discussion should probably head over to News & Developments: Port Adelaide to avoid taking this thread too off-topic.