Sensational-Adelaide.com

Another view at the corner of North Tce and Frome St (similar to where Rubberman was).

Excuse the quality, I was shooting into the sun.

From yesterday.

rubberman wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:16 pm

Excuse the quality, I was shooting into the sun.

Maybe try shading the lens with a spare hand (if you have one)?

It seems they found the old rails under the road, I saw cut sleepers about 8-10 inches deep

As for speed of construction, they are flying through

OlympusAnt wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:19 pm

It seems they found the old rails under the road, I saw cut sleepers about 8-10 inches deep

As for speed of construction, they are flying through

I don't know if any rails were found. The sleepers were encased in concrete by the MTT, so some were probably left there because they were too hard to get out.

This seems like a ridiculously short-sighted decision! They decided not to build a grand union junction after all, it's a real pity.

https://indaily.com.au/news/2017/10/09/ ... m-network/

It is a pity, and it's also not good that they haven't released any information on routes yet.

shiftaling wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:16 pm

This seems like a ridiculously short-sighted decision! They decided not to build a grand union junction after all, it's a real pity.

https://indaily.com.au/news/2017/10/09/ ... m-network/

My read is that they considered it, but the requirement for a retaining wall in the NW corner of the intersection out the front of Parliament House would have blown the budget. As long as they design what we are getting for easy passenger transfer from N/S trams on KWS to E/W trams on North Tce then not really an issue IMO.

Does a grand junction really cost an extra $20m though? Are the tracks made of gold?

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:08 pm

Does a grand junction really cost an extra $20m though? Are the tracks made of gold?

I dont know, but I'd imagine with an extra degree or three of complexity it would require more maintenance. There'd be that cost, plus imagine the bleating if KWS/North Tce intersection was shut for maintenance works every few months?

grand unions are extremely expensive, and due to tight light rail track standards, geometrically difficult to construct (intersection needs to be dead flat). there are only a few left operating around the world (incl one in melbourne which is worth seeing), and unless the network absolutely needs it, the additional expense is difficult to justify (not to mention ongoing operational and maintenance costs). it would certainly be great to have one at the north tce / kw st intersection, but the reality is that the junction we are getting will be suitable for Adelaide's network. in terms of future proofing, once the remainder of the city loop is built, we will get the same flexibility from the network by using the loop rather than sending all routes through that intersection (ie if a service needs to go from northbound KW st to eastbound North Tce to head to Norwood, it might be able to use the city loop to head east rather than making the turn at the KW / North Tce intersection).

Actually that city loop idea does potentially allay some concerns. Hopefully it eventuates!

Kasey771 wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:11 pm

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:08 pm

Does a grand junction really cost an extra $20m though? Are the tracks made of gold?

I dont know, but I'd imagine with an extra degree or three of complexity it would require more maintenance. There'd be that cost, plus imagine the bleating if KWS/North Tce intersection was shut for maintenance works every few months?

Plus there's issues like the retaining wall and what not.

Either way they would've went, the government would've been hounded by the media for it. If they did it, there would be the bleating about $20 million for nothing, the extra maintenance, and what not. They didn't, and there's the bleating about being short sighted.

That Indaily report is BS.

Twenty million extra for a few extra turnouts? Pull the other one! That's patent nonsense.

Then the line that modern trams can't handle the same slopes as Adelaide's original 1909 trams could? What a crock. Modern trams can handle much greater slopes than that. Have Indaily people never been to Melbourne?

I am not an advocate for a grand union. Most tram operators avoid any unnecessary turnouts, and certainly don't put them in "just in case". However, coming up with fairy stories like $20m extra for a couple of extra turnouts, or that modern trams cant handle the slopes is stupid.

Makes you wonder if their "source" knows anything at all about trams.

Edit: It's just occurred to me that the slope limitation for trams could be referring to the Citadis. It might be that since the Citadis is actually a single truck "bib and bub" arrangement, turning plus slope change might crush the linkages between sections. That's just a speculation, so take it with a grain of salt. Having said that, single bogie designs are NOT modern. They were obsolete 100 years ago. A bib and bub tram with a modern sleek body is still limited by physics.