Sensational-Adelaide.com

monotonehell wrote: Considering how many departures would be necessary to service all the suburban lines, how large would a subterranean station need to be and how could it operate? Sitting in Adelaide Station during peak period suggests that a lot of thought needs to be put into this. I doubt a subway like the MATS plan would cut it these days.

Melbourne's City Loop runs four tracks and most of the stations have four platforms, and it moves far more people than Adelaide's entire network. Sydney Town Hall is four platforms, Circular Quay and Museum are both two platforms. Adelaide station is massively, massively under-utilised at nine platforms, demonstrated by the fact that it's used as a lay-over area.

jk1237 wrote:no no, whats proposed and needed is an underground loop from the Adl railway station, under the CBD, and the under the west parklands to meet up to the main lines near Keswick, to rid Adel of its dead end situation. The MATS plan was also trying to do this. Therefore the same train from Gawler continues to Noarlunga, Grange train goes to Belair, Outer Harb train goes to Brighton/Tonsley etc, so we dont need a large station at all. I even reckon we could cope with 2 tunnels only, 1 north bound and 1 southbound, because you could get away with having trains every 3 mins, I think

Even considering the tonnes of people getting on and off? Also considering peak periods where the name of the game is to get a load of people into the city in the morning and out in the afternoon? The MATS plan also called for the removal of Adelaide Railway Station.

I guess you'd need to have one platform on one side for getting on and the other side for getting off?

AtD wrote:Melbourne's City Loop runs four tracks and most of the stations have four platforms, and it moves far more people than Adelaide's entire network. Sydney Town Hall is four platforms, Circular Quay and Museum are both two platforms. Adelaide station is massively, massively under-utilised at nine platforms, demonstrated by the fact that it's used as a lay-over area.

Yes Adelaide's current needs more platforms because it is a dead end. But it sounds that we'd definitely need more than one line and one platform.

AtD wrote:Melbourne's City Loop runs four tracks and most of the stations have four platforms, and it moves far more people than Adelaide's entire network. Sydney Town Hall is four platforms, Circular Quay and Museum are both two platforms. Adelaide station is massively, massively under-utilised at nine platforms, demonstrated by the fact that it's used as a lay-over area.

Town Hall has six platforms, two platforms serving each of the three suburban sectors on the CityRail network.

Central Station in Sydney also has some inefficiencies similar to those at Adelaide Station as well. There are 25 platforms in use, with 14 south of Central but only 8 north of it. Platforms 1-15 are terminating platforms while the through platforms at platforms 20-23 are sometimes used for terminating trains also.

monotonehell wrote:Considering how many departures would be necessary to service all the suburban lines, how large would a subterranean station need to be and how could it operate? Sitting in Adelaide Station during peak period suggests that a lot of thought needs to be put into this. I doubt a subway like the MATS plan would cut it these days.

Following on from what I mentioned in reply to AtD's post, a lack of tracks in the CBD and the overdepedence on a small number of tracks creates a few potential issues. Having only 2 through tracks in the CBD would be far cheaper than having 4 tracks, but any problem on the short two track section in the CBD would ripple across the entire network. This phenomenon can be seen easily in Sydney. A problem on the North Shore Line could easily cause network wide delays because of interlinking of many lines on the same tracks. 4 tracks would allow the network to theoretically be split into two isolated groups which would also allow for easier timetabling and higher future capacity should passenger numbers quickly outstrip the capacity of having only two tracks. Of course this is more expensive.

AG wrote:Following on from what I mentioned in reply to AtD's post, a lack of tracks in the CBD and the overdepedence on a small number of tracks creates a few potential issues. Having only 2 through tracks in the CBD would be far cheaper than having 4 tracks, but any problem on the short two track section in the CBD would ripple across the entire network. This phenomenon can be seen easily in Sydney. A problem on the North Shore Line could easily cause network wide delays because of interlinking of many lines on the same tracks. 4 tracks would allow the network to theoretically be split into two isolated groups which would also allow for easier timetabling and higher future capacity should passenger numbers quickly outstrip the capacity of having only two tracks. Of course this is more expensive.

So what you're saying is that a series of busways would be a better idea and we should just dig up all the rail and put in more OBahns? I completely agree with you.

*innocent look*

Having been on the O-Bahn today, with the amount of faults with vibrations and shaking, the O-Bahn should be replaced ASAP. I think it is getting to a point where the vibrations are downright dangerous.

Norman wrote:Having been on the O-Bahn today, with the amount of faults with vibrations and shaking, the O-Bahn should be replaced ASAP. I think it is getting to a point where the vibrations are downright dangerous.

I have said to you before, just wait until the new model hits the tracks.

History has shown that new models won't necessarily solve vibrating. Look at the Scania low floor that's been in service for some years, for example.

Rear guide wheels on artics would help IMO

Cruise wrote:

Norman wrote:Having been on the O-Bahn today, with the amount of faults with vibrations and shaking, the O-Bahn should be replaced ASAP. I think it is getting to a point where the vibrations are downright dangerous.

I have said to you before, just wait until the new model hits the tracks.

But I was on the new K230 today... is it normal for the driver to be holding the steering wheel? If not, the bus was still shaking on the track.

Norman wrote:

Cruise wrote:

Norman wrote:Having been on the O-Bahn today, with the amount of faults with vibrations and shaking, the O-Bahn should be replaced ASAP. I think it is getting to a point where the vibrations are downright dangerous.

I have said to you before, just wait until the new model hits the tracks.

But I was on the new K230 today... is it normal for the driver to be holding the steering wheel? If not, the bus was still shaking on the track.

OK... well just wait for the artic....


oh to hell with it i have not been all truful to you, there is a new model on the way

Norman wrote:

Cruise wrote:

Norman wrote:Having been on the O-Bahn today, with the amount of faults with vibrations and shaking, the O-Bahn should be replaced ASAP. I think it is getting to a point where the vibrations are downright dangerous.

I have said to you before, just wait until the new model hits the tracks.

But I was on the new K230 today... is it normal for the driver to be holding the steering wheel? If not, the bus was still shaking on the track.

.....Shouldn't the driver be holding the steering wheel anyway?

Omicron wrote:

Norman wrote:

Cruise wrote:I have said to you before, just wait until the new model hits the tracks.

But I was on the new K230 today... is it normal for the driver to be holding the steering wheel? If not, the bus was still shaking on the track.

.....Shouldn't the driver be holding the steering wheel anyway?

It's a guided bus system omi

Cruise wrote:

Omicron wrote:

Norman wrote: But I was on the new K230 today... is it normal for the driver to be holding the steering wheel? If not, the bus was still shaking on the track.

.....Shouldn't the driver be holding the steering wheel anyway?

It's a guided bus system omi

Just in case of the unexpected, my dear Mr. Cruise, just in case.

That, or we should get a brick to place on the accelerator pedal and have the O-Bahn run itself! Who needs clever accounting techniques to save money when you have bricks?!

Omicron wrote:

Cruise wrote:

Omicron wrote: .....Shouldn't the driver be holding the steering wheel anyway?

It's a guided bus system omi

Just in case of the unexpected, my dear Mr. Cruise, just in case.

That, or we should get a brick to place on the accelerator pedal and have the O-Bahn run itself! Who needs clever accounting techniques to save money when you have bricks?!

well then i wouldnt be needed seeing as i am the better half of CRUISE control!!!


no bricks needed!!!

Cruise wrote:

Omicron wrote:

Cruise wrote:

It's a guided bus system omi

Just in case of the unexpected, my dear Mr. Cruise, just in case.

That, or we should get a brick to place on the accelerator pedal and have the O-Bahn run itself! Who needs clever accounting techniques to save money when you have bricks?!

well then i wouldnt be needed seeing as i am the better half of CRUISE control!!!


no bricks needed!!!

*facepalm*