Sensational-Adelaide.com

just on the obahn - do the tracks ever need to be upgraded?

and does every bus terminate at Tea Tree Gully?

Waewick wrote:just on the obahn - do the tracks ever need to be upgraded?

and does every bus terminate at Tea Tree Gully?

Interesting question - I'm of the understanding that because the project was done as cheaply as possible, the concrete sleepers are of poor quality and were found to last only 30 years. The O-Bahn was first constructed in 1986 - meaning that there would be deterioration in the track quality from 2016 onwards.

No, most buses services continue on to service the areas of St Agnes, Golden Grove, Salisbury and even Elizabeth. The former J1 and J2 routes used to go all they way from Elizabeth to Adelaide Airport via the OBahn. Quite a lengthy trip!

[Shuz] wrote:

Waewick wrote:just on the obahn - do the tracks ever need to be upgraded?

and does every bus terminate at Tea Tree Gully?

Interesting question - I'm of the understanding that because the project was done as cheaply as possible, the concrete sleepers are of poor quality and were found to last only 30 years. The O-Bahn was first constructed in 1986 - meaning that there would be deterioration in the track quality from 2016 onwards.

No, most buses services continue on to service the areas of St Agnes, Golden Grove, Salisbury and even Elizabeth. The former J1 and J2 routes used to go all they way from Elizabeth to Adelaide Airport via the OBahn. Quite a lengthy trip!

thanks

Waewick wrote:just on the obahn - do the tracks ever need to be upgraded?

and does every bus terminate at Tea Tree Gully?

The OBahn tracks have seen a little maintenance over the years, far less than what was budgeted. I assume there will be a point where they will need to be replaced, eventually. Unlike rail which needs to be serviced continuously.

People need to realise that OBahn tracks are not traintracks - that is buses can enter and leave at will via the stations and continue via the road. So many people keep viewing the OBahn as just a cheap train replacement.

Because of this not all routes use the full length of the OBahn. Some enter and leave at Klemzig servicing the local suburbs there, others leave at Paradise or Modbury and continue out to the North-eastern suburbs, some continue out to the North from there servicing many points between Paradise/Modbury and Mawson Lakes/Elizabeth.

A problem with trains is that they require feeder buses to collect passengers from surrounding suburbs, in order to condense them onto a train to travel to their destination. People who live away from the train's route are tempted to use their car for the whole journey instead of having to transfer vehicles, or drive directly to their nearest station.

The OBahn does both jobs, in peak times transfers are not usually necessary except on a few minor feeder routes.


Unless we all start living with in walking distance of a train station, transfer-phobia will continue to be an issue.

[Shuz] wrote:

Waewick wrote:just on the obahn - do the tracks ever need to be upgraded?

and does every bus terminate at Tea Tree Gully?

Interesting question - I'm of the understanding that because the project was done as cheaply as possible, the concrete sleepers are of poor quality and were found to last only 30 years. The O-Bahn was first constructed in 1986 - meaning that there would be deterioration in the track quality from 2016 onwards.

No, most buses services continue on to service the areas of St Agnes, Golden Grove, Salisbury and even Elizabeth. The former J1 and J2 routes used to go all they way from Elizabeth to Adelaide Airport via the OBahn. Quite a lengthy trip!

The original life expectancy of the track was 25 years, but that was lifted to 50 years recently as it's been found to be in better condition than expected.

So what are the advantages of an O-Bahn system over a regular busway?

Hooligan wrote:So what are the advantages of an O-Bahn system over a regular busway?

and could trains and an o-bahn (guided busway) co-exist in the same corridor? Would seem feasible to me, although maybe problematic at level crossings.

Wayno wrote:

Hooligan wrote:So what are the advantages of an O-Bahn system over a regular busway?

and could trains and an o-bahn (guided busway) co-exist in the same corridor? Would seem feasible to me, although maybe problematic at level crossings.

I've had my own ideas for a while regarding a shared O-Bahn, but with Trams and Buses. Probably works better in theory though.

I am surprised at the responses that a rail service has to be economically proven BEFORE it is built. Statements like, well a bus is cheaper to run than a train do not take in all the factors.... a 4 car train with 1 driver and 1 guard, using less fuel than 4 buses, not taking up road space and deteriorating the roads and able to run on electricity instead of diesel is equally as ecomic as a bus. The O Bahn may be well patronised, but we do not know how well a train service would be patronised on that route as there is no train to compare. I know of people that live in St Agnes and commute to the city and still find the O Bahn slow but they have no alternative so use it anyway..it has a captive market.Certainly a train would be quicker entering the CBD than the current Obahn service. Adelaide needs to stop treating buses like trains and use buses to get commuters to local interchanges for fast express servixces into the city. This would get many buses out of the CBD and off inner suburban roads.

I swear I read someone saying that the fear of transfers is a phenomena unique to Adelaide, but now that I try to find the text to quote it's not there. But anyway for what it's worth... I remember reading this in a lot of papers back when I cared enough to actually research things before I made a statement. Also I was in Uni so I had ready access to academic publications.

For example:
"Transfers are often necessary to complete trips; however, travelers perceive them as negative experiences. Travelers dislike the time and cost required for transferring, but they also dislike the need for added trip planning, the possibility of a missed connection, the uncertainty of arrival time at their destination, exposure to weather and crowding, the need to find the next vehicle, difficulty of baggage handling and waiting in unfamiliar or hostile surroundings."
(Horowitz A J & Thompson N A, 1994, Evaluation of Intermodal Passenger Transfer Facilities, USA)
http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=411441

Heardy_101 wrote:I've had my own ideas for a while regarding a shared O-Bahn, but with Trams and Buses. Probably works better in theory though.

You really need to do some more reading about the OBahn, if you had you'd realise that the OBahn was invented in the first place to allow buses and trams to share the same tunnel. So not just in theory at all.

claybro wrote:...Statements like, well a bus is cheaper to run than a train do not take in all the factors.... a 4 car train with 1 driver and 1 guard, using less fuel than 4 buses, not taking up road space and deteriorating the roads and able to run on electricity instead of diesel is equally as ecomic as a bus...

Do you have any references for this statement? Everything I've looked at in the past shows capital and running costs for bus is lower than rail. The only time rail is economical is when it is at passenger capacity. When running part empty it costs considerably more, leading to the idea of using a bus to replace rail off peak.

Set aside the taking up road space and deteriorating the roads factors as those are mitigated by less cars on the road or by building a transit corridor for the buses (ie the OBahn, which again can be built at a lower capital cost and operating maintenance cost than a railway).

This study wasn't available last time I looked into this, but shows the same pattern as the heavy rail situation in Adelaide at the time:
"£ per vehicle km: UK light rail: £3.79 UK bus: £0.94
£ per passenger km: UK light rail: £0.14 UK bus: £0.08"
(Commission for Integrated Transport, 2005, Affordable mass transit - guidance, UK)
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. ... /index.htm

claybro wrote:The O Bahn may be well patronised, but we do not know how well a train service would be patronised on that route as there is no train to compare. I know of people that live in St Agnes and commute to the city and still find the O Bahn slow but they have no alternative so use it anyway..it has a captive market.Certainly a train would be quicker entering the CBD than the current Obahn service. Adelaide needs to stop treating buses like trains and use buses to get commuters to local interchanges for fast express servixces into the city. This would get many buses out of the CBD and off inner suburban roads.

A train would be quicker entering the city, but would dump all the passengers at Adelaide Railway Station which would mean two transfers for a lot of passengers. One for the feeders in the suburbs and one for the distributors in the city. The Obahn takes care of both of these. A train would definitely have greater capacity. The OBahn is not at capacity yet, but has a long way to go. I can't find the capacity estimates now. Also because of capacity a train would provide a pulsed service, compared to the continuous delivery that the OBahn provides. This would mean a glut of passengers leaving on less regular services.

It's about the right service for the right situation. The OBahn performs well in the North Eastern suburbs because of their layout and the road alternatives. A train on the same alignment would not give the same door to door service as the OBahn. In other circumstances a railway would be better suited.

monotonehell wrote:

Heardy_101 wrote:I've had my own ideas for a while regarding a shared O-Bahn, but with Trams and Buses. Probably works better in theory though.

You really need to do some more reading about the OBahn, if you had you'd realise that the OBahn was invented in the first place to allow buses and trams to share the same tunnel. So not just in theory at all.

I realise this, however that was 30 years ago. The O-Bahn was originally a Glenelg Tram extension proposal put forward by Labor, then the Libs came up with the Bus thing instead. Come election time, the Libs got in to even their own shock and horror and the rest is history.

The reason why I say it works better in theory is because it probably wouldn't work as practically as one would think, as I'm curious as to whether a Tram would have the guts to manage some of the grades, plus some of the clearances. Obviously a massive upgrade and probably a lowered track would be needed before we get a T-Bahn.

If a tram can cope with the gradients found in San Francisco, I'm pretty sure a tram will do just fine along the O-Bahn.

Do you have any credibility to what you say, Heardy?

[Shuz] wrote:If a tram can cope with the gradients found in San Francisco, I'm pretty sure a tram will do just fine along the O-Bahn.

Do you have any credibility to what you say, Heardy?

Actually it's quite a sensible question. The San Francisco trams with very steep gradients are cable operated. The slopes on their electric lines are far gentler.

Still, the answer is yes, the O-bahn route is suitable. But our O-bahn's main strength is its speed, and trams can't match that so easily.

Trams can quite easily match the speed of O-bahn buses - there were plenty of US interurbans doing just that 100 years ago. There are dark rumours that the old Glenelg H cars could do that before the field weakening notch was cut out of service - it is certainly not out of the question, even though not confirmed anywhere afaik.

Why transport managers refuse to do it is another question. It is a matter of policy rather than capability. The present sedate and stately progress of the Glenelg line is nowhere near what it could be should the powers that be decide to make it so.

As far as the question of grades is concerned, I guess the first question is what they are. Then one can say at what speed they can be tackled. Generally, the questions of performance relate to passenger comfort rather than to equipment capability. With only very very few exceptions, trams can match bus performance in practical terms.

rubberman wrote:Trams can quite easily match the speed of O-bahn buses...

Are you sure? What I've read shows that the OBahn operates at around 80Kmh, heavy rail at about 60kph, light rail where it has right of way at about 50kph, while on street light rail (trams) at around 40kph.