Sensational-Adelaide.com

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:14 pm

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:53 am

dsriggs wrote:I can't find the words "train" or "tram" anywhere in these articles.

Must be a mistake!

Same, which irritates me. This responsibility is also on the State Government, which is starting to fail in the public transport space.

I have a feeling the lack of train connection to the airport represents a hesitancy on the part of the government about the airport's future there.

I feel like it's more the fact that successive governments (especially the last two) have been disinterested in expanding the rail network, but are happy build new infrastructure on the outskirts when:
(1) they can get a few hundred million gifted by the federal government; and
(2) it poses no inconvenience on motorists.

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 11:32 am

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 11:21 am

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 19, 2023 10:13 pm

Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport doesn't yet have a rail connection and it's one of the largest airports in the country...

There has been talk of moving the airport up north for years, be that Edinburgh RAAF base or the land parcel in Wingfield above the Port River Expressway, Ultimately Adelaide is very fortunate to have an ideally placed airport, close to the CBD and central for people up north, down south and further east. Spending billions on moving the airport elsewhere for a change in the flight path so we can build skyscrapers that we don't need is an utterly wasteful and frankly stupid notion.

Melbourne airport is getting a rail connection as soon as 2026 on their massive new rail network. Adelaide will be the only major airport in the Top 5 without a rail connection.

Hence my mentioning of it not having one 'yet'. 50-odd years of planning, most of which it has been Australia's second busiest airport and even then, the final outcome not a direct rail link, it will still will act as a suburban line, that's the only reason they've been able to justify the expense of it to those taxpayers against the idea. My point is, like you (seemingly) and others I would love to see a rail link to Adelaide Airport (for me, in the way of a tram, because it's cheaper to build and will more likely get off the ground) because the current bus system is inadequate, especially for what's planned for Adelaide Airport in the coming years, but it doesn't mean that Adelaide Airport can't sustain itself without a rail link.

The recent piece done by InDaily regarding the inadequacies of Adelaide's PT and more specifically our rail network showed the preferred route by the lobbying body for getting a tram to Adelaide Airport, which involved a spur line from the Port Road/James Condon Drive intersection and running it along there, using a mixture of stormwater corridors, median strips and quieter Western Suburbs roads to make it happen, and I think that's the real winner. So long as there are lobbyist putting these more efficient ideas out in the mix, the more likely we are to see it happen when the absolute need is there.

Really!? I spur line, 'using a mixture of stormwater corridors, median strips and quieter Western Suburbs roads".
The most logical would be a line from Victoria Square, running down Grote street and Sir Donald Bradman Drive. It could be an L-shaded line running Airport to North Adelaide and back via King William street. Henley Beach road would also work, running up Currie Street before joining onto the King William street line and continuing up to O'Connel Street.

RoiMartel wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 7:26 am

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 11:32 am

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 11:21 am

Melbourne airport is getting a rail connection as soon as 2026 on their massive new rail network. Adelaide will be the only major airport in the Top 5 without a rail connection.

Hence my mentioning of it not having one 'yet'. 50-odd years of planning, most of which it has been Australia's second busiest airport and even then, the final outcome not a direct rail link, it will still will act as a suburban line, that's the only reason they've been able to justify the expense of it to those taxpayers against the idea. My point is, like you (seemingly) and others I would love to see a rail link to Adelaide Airport (for me, in the way of a tram, because it's cheaper to build and will more likely get off the ground) because the current bus system is inadequate, especially for what's planned for Adelaide Airport in the coming years, but it doesn't mean that Adelaide Airport can't sustain itself without a rail link.

The recent piece done by InDaily regarding the inadequacies of Adelaide's PT and more specifically our rail network showed the preferred route by the lobbying body for getting a tram to Adelaide Airport, which involved a spur line from the Port Road/James Condon Drive intersection and running it along there, using a mixture of stormwater corridors, median strips and quieter Western Suburbs roads to make it happen, and I think that's the real winner. So long as there are lobbyist putting these more efficient ideas out in the mix, the more likely we are to see it happen when the absolute need is there.

Really!? I spur line, 'using a mixture of stormwater corridors, median strips and quieter Western Suburbs roads".
The most logical would be a line from Victoria Square, running down Grote street and Sir Donald Bradman Drive. It could be an L-shaded line running Airport to North Adelaide and back via King William street. Henley Beach road would also work, running up Currie Street before joining onto the King William street line and continuing up to O'Connel Street.

Side-Note. I know bus traffic is an issue on Currie street, but that section of track could be "Express", with the first actual CBD stop being around the corner on KW Street. OR it could just skip Currie and take a left onto West Terrace before continuing on the North Terrace line.

If a government ever did consider the storm drain tram approach (which would be quite expensive due to the narrowness of that corridor along most of the route requiring a bunch of residential acquisitions) I think it would actually be more beneficial to consider making it O-Bahn track.

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 3:09 pm

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 11:32 am

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 11:21 am

Melbourne airport is getting a rail connection as soon as 2026 on their massive new rail network. Adelaide will be the only major airport in the Top 5 without a rail connection.

Hence my mentioning of it not having one 'yet'. 50-odd years of planning, most of which it has been Australia's second busiest airport and even then, the final outcome not a direct rail link, it will still will act as a suburban line, that's the only reason they've been able to justify the expense of it to those taxpayers against the idea. My point is, like you (seemingly) and others I would love to see a rail link to Adelaide Airport (for me, in the way of a tram, because it's cheaper to build and will more likely get off the ground) because the current bus system is inadequate, especially for what's planned for Adelaide Airport in the coming years, but it doesn't mean that Adelaide Airport can't sustain itself without a rail link.

The recent piece done by InDaily regarding the inadequacies of Adelaide's PT and more specifically our rail network showed the preferred route by the lobbying body for getting a tram to Adelaide Airport, which involved a spur line from the Port Road/James Condon Drive intersection and running it along there, using a mixture of stormwater corridors, median strips and quieter Western Suburbs roads to make it happen, and I think that's the real winner. So long as there are lobbyist putting these more efficient ideas out in the mix, the more likely we are to see it happen when the absolute need is there.

I think the obvious reason Melbourne didn’t have a connection would be its remote location away from suburbia. It’s illogical to think an airport of that size, if closer to the cbd, wouldn’t have had a rail connection. If it was closer it would have been connected decades ago. We’re in the opposite situation, but our problem is that the past state governments couldn’t get their sh!t together and build a connection by now. On another note, I admire Melbourne’s advantage of its remote location and lack of curfew, something Adelaide could have benefitted from had it been moved further north. But with its location set in stone now, (with this possible multi-billion dollar expansion going forward) maybe the airport could just send everyone some ear muffs and remove the curfew . Or on a more serious note, pay for sound proofing insulation (which is efficient) of affected house holds. It works better then you think… and would allow increased air traffic.

It's barely 35 minutes on the freeway to reach the CBD.
There's 'suburbia' directly to the east of it, to the north east, to the south and south west.

Melbournes airport rail link was planned to open in 2029, it's now delayed.
https://australianaviation.com.au/2023/ ... train-row/

There's already been sound proofing of homes under the flight path.

The mode most suited to the Keswick Creek alignment would be monorail! But no, I’m not suggesting building one, as that isn’t a sensible route.
SDBD would be a much better route for trams.

Aidan wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 11:26 am

The mode most suited to the Keswick Creek alignment would be monorail! But no, I’m not suggesting building one, as that isn’t a sensible route.
SDBD would be a much better route for trams.

Not suited for monorail as it would have a monorail running almost directly above a bunch of suburban backyards. Yes to the idea of a SDB tram in general though.

Nort wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 9:27 am

If a government ever did consider the storm drain tram approach (which would be quite expensive due to the narrowness of that corridor along most of the route requiring a bunch of residential acquisitions) I think it would actually be more beneficial to consider making it O-Bahn track.

Why not put rails in the concrete track, and have both? Trams and buses have always shared road space.

Honestly I’d be more for a train/tram than buses. Like take it from an international travellers point of view. Who would want to travel on one of Adelaide metros old, musty buses when a train/tram would have a much smoother, more modern ride, and quicker (if it’s constructed in a direct route). I’d pay for a tram/train any day over a bus.

Using Keswick Creek as a right of way for a tram has many drawbacks that I think rule it out:

- Other than Hisense stadium, there's not much other than low density housing along it. You could maybe draw some people into the Hamra Library at Hilton.
- At Cowandilla the Primary School takes up a huge site that isn't going to draw many passenger trips
- At West Richmond the tram still needs to get around the eastern end of the runway to get to the passenger terminal. If this needs to go underground or through back streets of Brooklyn Park this could get expensive very quickly
- Getting it across South Road is extremely problematic where plans for the NSM are largely in place, and the government will not want to add any complexity to that section, which comprises lanes turning onto James Congdon Drive, and the interface between the open motorway and Northern Tunnel section, at this stage

If trams are ever to venture into the inner-west, they would be better off down SBD or HBR's, which are more vibrant and more likely to add passenger trips along the way. My preference would be HBR given zoning along that section allows for more density, as well as the Thebarton Theatre. Then under the Bakewell Underpass and onto Currie or Waymouth Streets I would not expect anything to happen until the NSM is complete. Granted HBR does not have a direct connection to the motorway, but east-west traffic priority cannot be improved until volumes heading north-south are reduced.

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 21, 2023 3:56 pm

Honestly I’d be more for a train/tram than buses. Like take it from an international travellers point of view. Who would want to travel on one of Adelaide metros old, musty buses when a train/tram would have a much smoother, more modern ride, and quicker (if it’s constructed in a direct route). I’d pay for a tram/train any day over a bus.

Before Covid the airport J1X partially used a modern double decker bus similar to the Melbourne Airport SkyBuses.

It's not a straight either or, and in fact the best way of building a case for more investment into future rail links to the airport could be to beef up the existing airport services, make them more clearly accessible from the terminal, and see how patronage does on them.

Correct, the existing bus service is confusing for tourists with the different iterations of J1 / J2 / J1X // J1T etc, as a long route originating in the north-east often runs late, and does a route to the city that uses South Road for the section between SBD and HBR's.

With airport patronage returning to pre-covid levels, maybe its time to consider a dedicated airport service, direct to the city via SDB and along Grote Street, that can be marketed at the airport and in tourism brochures. Build patronage on a dedicated and reliable bus service to the airport, then in the longer term (when the NSM is done), consider other options.

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2023 12:15 am

The masterplan for the Multi-function Polis showed a third runway as I have illustrated:

Nice graph bro, but If they were to build a second “main” runway (parallel to the current main runway) it would have to meet aviation certification standards, meaning it would have to be 3km long for the wide body aircraft. Looks like it would extend out into the beach area on an artificial man-made sand bar, since it can’t be build east because of the car park and houses. West beach might be blocked in the future. Maybe they could put a tunnel underneath the runway for pedestrians.

The masterplan for the Multi-function Polis

that should end any serious discussion right there

There’s no need to extend the crosswind runway. Crosswinds are a problem for small aircraft, but not for anything too big for the existing crosswind runway length.

If and when a second parallel runway is needed, it would probably end west of the southern end of IKEA. A few buildings would have to be demolished, but none of great value.

Though current regulations require parallel runways to be equal length, that’s both economically and environmentally unsuitable for Adelaide airport as the bit of Patawalonga Creek in its path is the only remaining part in anything like its natural state. Regulations can be changed, or exceptions made.
Keeping the runway entirely east of Tapleys Hill Road would be far more practical. It would be sufficient to accommodate all the intrastate flights and some of the interstate ones, freeing up space on the main runway for longer range and higher capacity flights.

AAL’s alternative plan is to have some of the intrastate flights use Parafield instead.

ISTR some land near Riverlea was set aside for another airport. Is it still?

Bullett trains to Melbourne, including stations at an airport in the upper SE and at Melbourne Airport, are the best long term solution IMO.