News & Discussion: Trams

[1NEEDS2POST]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

[Ho Really]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

Aha!!! Someone likes my idea.

Cheers

[Waewick]

I don't understand the angst about a private company building their own line at their own expense (assuming it can integrate into existing lines).

If someone wants to spent $500m to do their project, doesn't that leave $500m for the State Govt to do something else?

[Norman]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

That would depend on how you construct the tram. If the tram is in its own corridor, it will be faster than a bus. If it's a shared corridor, then the time difference will be minimal.

Regarding the Keswick Drain idea... sure, if it's an express service, but trams are more than providing a service from A to B. It would also service and uplift the adjoining areas along Henley Beach Road to provide better access to homes and businesses along the corridor.

[Eurostar]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

Buy another double decker bus , for routes like J1X they are perfect plus they take up less space on the road compared to an articulated bus

[rubberman]

I don't understand the angst about a private company building their own line at their own expense (assuming it can integrate into existing lines).

If someone wants to spent $500m to do their project, doesn't that leave $500m for the State Govt to do something else?

If it was all at their expense, it might be palatable. However, my understanding of the proposal as originally reported was that they would build it, and the government would guarantee their profit. Plus give them a huge chunk of free real estate along Henley Beach Road.

IF they paid rent for that real estate AND the risk is all theirs, then of course the government should consider it, and favourably. However, if they want free real estate AND a government guaranteed return way, way, way above the bond rate, that would amount to a scandalous misuse of government money.

[Ho Really]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

That would depend on how you construct the tram. If the tram is in its own corridor, it will be faster than a bus. If it's a shared corridor, then the time difference will be minimal.

Regarding the Keswick Drain idea... sure, if it's an express service, but trams are more than providing a service from A to B. It would also service and uplift the adjoining areas along Henley Beach Road to provide better access to homes and businesses along the corridor.

Norman, the service to Adelaide Airport should be exclusive. Not a tram up and down suburban streets. On the same principle as the Airport Express in Hong Kong.

Cheers

[Joelmark]

Very much doubt an airport express or airport only tram or light rail would work or could be justified on present arrival / departure figures. If the main line was constructed to Henley Beach or West Lakes with a spur from the airport to the main line (like the Port Dock extension will be) perhaps, but the "build it and they will come" prophecy probably wouldn't work as the airport is already very close to the city centre so convenient for taxis and the bus, and for the significant proportion of airport users who are picked up / dropped off by family and friends, the CBD is not the main focus.

[Norman]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

That would depend on how you construct the tram. If the tram is in its own corridor, it will be faster than a bus. If it's a shared corridor, then the time difference will be minimal.

Regarding the Keswick Drain idea... sure, if it's an express service, but trams are more than providing a service from A to B. It would also service and uplift the adjoining areas along Henley Beach Road to provide better access to homes and businesses along the corridor.

Norman, the service to Adelaide Airport should be exclusive. Not a tram up and down suburban streets. On the same principle as the Airport Express in Hong Kong.

Cheers

If you're going down that path, you might as well forget about the tram and build a heavy rail underground tunnel from the city.

[rev]

Trams in tunnels.
Tram link to the airport, in a tunnel. Tram loop around the city/cbd, in tunnels.

State building project.

[Nort]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

I don't understand the angst about a private company building their own line at their own expense (assuming it can integrate into existing lines).

If someone wants to spent $500m to do their project, doesn't that leave $500m for the State Govt to do something else?

If they can present a solid business case for how they intend to make $500 million back from a tram that would be competing against $5 bus tickets and $25 15 minute taxi fares to the CBD without relying on any government revenue guarantees then sure. I'm a big fan of idea of rail going to the airport and would love to see them have a way for those numbers to stack up.

[claybro]

A tram to the airport running on the road will be no faster than a bus. There is no justification for the expense when we have a solution that works. The money spent on a tram would be better spent painting bus lanes and increasing the frequency. This will deliver a much better service than a tram via the road.

That's not to say I'm totally opposed to a tram to the airport. A tram or train would make sense if it uses the Keswick Creek drain. This will give it a grade separated path that will make it much faster than going by road.

That would depend on how you construct the tram. If the tram is in its own corridor, it will be faster than a bus. If it's a shared corridor, then the time difference will be minimal.

Regarding the Keswick Drain idea... sure, if it's an express service, but trams are more than providing a service from A to B. It would also service and uplift the adjoining areas along Henley Beach Road to provide better access to homes and businesses along the corridor.

Norman, the service to Adelaide Airport should be exclusive. Not a tram up and down suburban streets. On the same principle as the Airport Express in Hong Kong.

Cheers

Elsewhere in Australia, the cities that currently have rail links to airport ie Brisbane and Sydney do not exclusively service the CBD and Airport. They have intermediate stations servicing other areas. The new underground link to Perth airport will also use the existing rail network with suburban stops, as will the Planned Tullamarine link. Adelaide should not therefore expect a dedicated CBD to airport link. it just isn't feasible. If done properly with right of way along Henley Beach or SDB, with limited stops, a light rail will be significantly quicker that a bus, and much more attractive to patronage.

[Waewick]

would it be plausible to have express from the Airport but other tams also using the same line? They can split the difference where there is joint usage and then pay for their bit that no one else will use ?

Trying to look at it pragmatically, I'm not sure it has been very often that there has been private money thrown into the SA infrastructure pot, so to just say no on ideology basis without exploring the options seem counterproductive.

[SBD]

A financial justification/business case for a tram to the airport needs to consider who might travel on it, and where the other end of their journey is. This conversation seems to be unclear of any justification beyond "vehicles on rails are cool".

In particular, air travellers break into four main groups - the ones visiting Adelaide, and the ones who live/are based here; and business or leisure/tourists.

I've only used a tram once to get to/from an airport. It was San Jose, California, which is a relatively small airport and the tramline was a street or two away from the terminal. I had to walk about the same distance as to the long Term car park at Adelaide airport, and caught a regular suburban tram with some luggage space. There was wayfinding signage to assure me I was doing something sensible. the bus stop on Sir Donald Bradman Drive near Airport Road is about the same distance. There was a tram stop on the same route right in front of my conference venue and hotel.

Business travellers and inbound tourists might mostly want the CBD, but if they are not prepared to walk to SDBD to catch a passing tram, they probably don't want to walk far the other end either. The Melbourne Airport Bus system takes you right to the door of almost any CBD hotel you need, but not down St Kilda Rd, and only to the set list of places they go (I needed to name a hotel to use it to visit my Dad in hospital as they would not drop off at the hospital, but would happily drop me at the hotel opposite once I worked out its name). Many business travellers will use taxis as it saves them having to learn to navigate in a strange city at all.

Outbound passengers don't typically start from the Adelaide CBD, so having luggage support for the spoke from the CBD to the airport is only useful in our hub-and-spoke transport network if all the other spokes can handle us bringing our luggage to the CBD and transferring to the airport line. Adelaide doesn't generally deal well with bringing a big suitcase on our public transport, so nobody tries. We drive to the airport or lean on a friend to drop us off/pick us up if we don't like the taxi fares from home.

How many of what kinds of people might use a tram with a dead-end stop at the airport plaza/hotel? I doubt it's a whole tramload per day!

[rubberman]

would it be plausible to have express from the Airport but other tams also using the same line? They can split the difference where there is joint usage and then pay for their bit that no one else will use ?

Trying to look at it pragmatically, I'm not sure it has been very often that there has been private money thrown into the SA infrastructure pot, so to just say no on ideology basis without exploring the options seem counterproductive.

Nothing to do with ideology. As originally reported, they wanted the government to guarantee their returns.

The only way that could ever be of advantage to the state is if the guarantee was capped at less than the bond rate. Otherwise it makes zero economic sense. Economic, not ideological.